Failed promises

[Kanegrundar]

Everyone is ideal in anecdote, aren't they?

Nice. I can't quite tell if you're calling me a liar or just had to put in a barb because you were wrong about my group...

Uh, no, actually. It's not in a designer's interest to cater exclusively to existing fans of a prior edition, because:

You're rather adept at putting words into other peoples' mouths aren't you? I never said that they should cater *exclusively* to fans of the line. However, putting out a book called Gamma World automatically attracts fans of the line and automatically makes it a nostalgia product.

A purely faithful treatment will just snag existing fans, who would buy the book out of brand allegiance/collectibility anyway, and as a form of fandom are likely to complain in any event. So basically, by being faithful you can only lose consumers who aren't part of prior fandom.

A treatment, faithful or not, done well will attract not only existing fans but new players as well. Take a look at 3E. It not only sold to old D&D players, but to new ones as well that had never played D&D before.

This is why fans need to be smarter about buying things. If you buy something regardless of how you feel about it, all the commentary in the world will not change the fact that the company has earned some money. The fact that your favoured form of recreation with the book is negative commentary is secondary to the fact that you actually *bought* it. A sale is a sale, whether it's to use in a game, look at the pictures or even out one of your table legs.

I talk about it because it sucks and I don't want to see other people end up wasting their money on shoddy product. That has little to do with it not having some of the things I hold dear in a Gamma World game, but more with it being a bad game. Hence the point of the entire thread. (A point that you seem to keep missing.)

Again, you assume you're entitled to a particular treatment of this property. You aren't. But you *can* influence what comes out greatly by using your purchasing power. If you choose not to, who's fault is that?

I want to know where this entitlement issue came from. You keep bringing it up, but I (nor anyone else) never said that. We can't all be perfect like you and never buy a poor book. GWPHB was one of the poor books that got through and I stated as much. Beyond that, I got a feeling that this is just a case of ruffled feathers from a fan...heck maybe even one of the authors seeing as how we don't know who you are.

Kane

 

[billd91]

Are you sure you aren't the odd man out?

Definitely not. From my experience, the only groups I've been in where everyone had the core books was an old 1st edition D&D campaign, and that was only after the books had been around for 7-8 years or so. All other games, including 2nd and 3rd edition D&D, involved groups where closer to 20-50% had the core books.

As long as there's a DM or a few other players willing to teach the basic rules and willingness to loan out the books from time to time, nothing more is necessary. Quite frankly, being able to do this has made it possible for us to try many more games than if all players had been expected to buy the rules.
Hardly the sign of an unhealthy group as eyebeams would suggest, in my opinion.

 

[eyebeams]

Spelljammer, of course. Possibly Dark*Matter. But that's just in terms of brands. We also published a wide variety of genres with strong appeal, including WW2, 70s car racing movies, mecha, etc. I think _part_ of Omega World's popularity has to do with the fact that it was tied to an existing property, but if that had been the case, why wasn't SSS's Gamma World likewise popular? They certainly had the space to do whatever they wanted, but what they ended up doing did not appeal to the pre-existing Gamma World fanbase, nor did it appeal much to anyone else.

Well, except for the fact that they weren't allowed to actually use half of the GW character types. As for its appeal: It went through its run and did its thing. There was vocal criticism here, then a few months later, admissions that many of these criticisms were premature. And like most such things, the majority of the noise yay or nay was generated by a small group.

But hey, White Wolf is in good company in this regard, because the Alternity version of Gamma World likewise missed the mark completely.

Screwing up Gamma World is a time-honored RPG industry tradition.

Yes -- one largely indulged by TSR, to boot.

It's probably also worth noting that Omega World was not simply popular with our "aging" audience, but also with a lot of newer gamers since Jonathan Tweet correctly identified what made the original Gamma World fun, and focused almost exclusively on that.

For my money, that's why Omega World is popular, and why the WW Gamma World ain't.

Tweet didn't "identify" anything. He made up a mission statement for Omega World. The "Wahoo" style wasn't a major part of the first two editions of GW and was touched on later to justify the sloppy design of a moribund list of stats tied to the MSH engine.

This is by no means meant to slag Jonothan Tweet. Omega World's best qualities were the ways in which it did not resemble the tone of the original GW, which was a contrast between what was (for the period) marked grittiness and a very odd menagerie. This was a dumb idea, and many 80s GW fan efforts (such as Ares magazine articles) were devoted to reigning in the oddness in favour of the grit.

If anything, Jonothan Tweet ignored the direction of those fans completely by favouring oddness over grit. That he was resurrecting the spirit of the old game is debateable.

 

[billd91]

Now that I've reminded you, feel free to reply to what I actually said: That one gamer being the constant economic contributor for the entire group is a bad idea.

Just because one player is the primary economic contributor doesn't really mean much if the other players are making meaningful contributions in other ways. Rule and source books are then only things that a gaming group needs.
I figure that as long as that book-buyer is willing to loan them out from time to time, that's enough for getting the knowledge of the rules into the players' heads. Once you've got that down, the books start to become superfluous, useful as on-the-spot references but not constantly used.

 

[eyebeams]

Nice. I can't quite tell if you're calling me a liar or just had to put in a barb because you were wrong about my group...

I'm saying that I stand by my remarks, regardless of anecdotes that, true or, not, are self-interested. Would you argue that you comments are not in your self interest?

You're rather adept at putting words into other peoples' mouths aren't you? I never said that they should cater *exclusively* to fans of the line. However, putting out a book called Gamma World automatically attracts fans of the line and automatically makes it a nostalgia product.

Sure. But it's not a fishing lure. It's a book. You're supposed to use personal discretion when you buy things.

A treatment, faithful or not, done well will attract not only existing fans but new players as well. Take a look at 3E. It not only sold to old D&D players, but to new ones as well that had never played D&D before.

And in many ways, 3e was not a faithful treatment. There's a whole game that earns a fair bit of coin from people who didn't like what 3e did, actually. Yet Hackmaster fans who don't care for 3e don't regularly post about how the D&D brand failed them.

I talk about it because it sucks and I don't want to see other people end up wasting their money on shoddy product. That has little to do with it not having some of the things I hold dear in a Gamma World game, but more with it being a bad game. Hence the point of the entire thread. (A point that you seem to keep missing.)

Yet your comments are impressionistic. Not once in this thread, for example, have you referred to the specific contents of the book, so it can't be said that you're providing concrete information about it with an added, "Such and such a thing didn't work for me."

I want to know where this entitlement issue came from. You keep bringing it up, but I (nor anyone else) ever said that.

The title of this thread is "Failed promises."

FWIW, I didn't write a word of GWD20, though I'm acquianted with some folks who did. There were parts I liked and parts I didn't. But in the end, I don't think it's a big deal. There's no consistent "classic" Gamma World in the first place. Each version of the game has been all over the place and if anything what's considered "classic" is a combination of designer spin and personal preference.

 

[billd91]

And in many ways, 3e was not a faithful treatment. There's a whole game that earns a fair bit of coin from people who didn't like what 3e did, actually. Yet Hackmaster fans who don't care for 3e don't regularly post about how the D&D brand failed them.

Though there are plenty of 1st/2nd edition D&D players (or OD&D like diaglo) who constantly harp on how 3E D&D failed them and their expectation. That's what edition wars are all about. I also have serious doubts that there are no Hackmaster fans out there regularly doing the same.
I think you're glossing over an awful lot as well as making overbroad assumptions on a good many things.

 

[Macbeth]

I'm no Gamma World historian, my first encounter with it was Omega World, which I thought was great. I heard the new books weren't much like that, so I skipped them, after all, I can always dig out Omega World if I want that kind of thing.

Perhaps the new Gamma World should have taken the path of Paranoia XP? Paranoia XP has three play styles: Classic, Straight and Zap!, all of which are valid and fun. You want a grittier, darker game, yo use Straight. Over the top zany in Zap. Classic is a midpoint between. All in all, it's great. the rules vary only slightly between types, it's more of a matter of mindset, but it really gives a breadth of appeal.

 

[Kanegrundar]

Yet your comments are impressionistic. Not once in this thread, for example, have you referred to the specific contents of the book, so it can't be said that you're providing concrete information about it with an added, "Such and such a thing didn't work for me."

Fair enough. Here's some of the things I didn't like:
Psionics rules were clunky and don't fit in with the D20 Modern norm, nor are they an improvement. They don't play well, and feel shoehorned into the system showing a lack of understanding of the rules.

Mutations were likewise clunky. While there were balancing factors involved, it still ended up creating characters with wildly varying power levels. (This is the one issue I have with DW2, but the mutations in DW2 are more or less balanced against each other.)

Nanotech likewise didn't work for me. There are some very good ideas there, and it's one of the few parts of the book that was done adequately. However, there are several powers (the names of which escape me since IDHTBIFOM) that showed a lack of understanding in the basic principles in how D20 works.

Why are there community rules in a Player's handbook? That chapter should have been left for the GMG.

The lack of mutant animals and plants as PC's. Granted, nothing says that S&SS had to add them to the game, but I (and many others) would have enjoyed their inclusion. Plus their inclusion would have added to a bit more of a "tookit" feel to the book rather than the implied nanotech setting that was included.

There are other issues, but since I haven't read it in a while I'll have to refresh my memory.

FWIW, I didn't write a word of GWD20, though I'm acquianted with some folks who did. There were parts I liked and parts I didn't. But in the end, I don't think it's a big deal. There's no consistent "classic" Gamma World in the first place. Each version of the game has been all over the place and if anything what's considered "classic" is a combination of designer spin and personal preference.

You may not have said word one about GWD20 directly, but since you only chimed in when I brought up my distaste with the book, you may as well had. OTOH, I agree that what makes up GW is wide and varied. A toolkit approach that offered plenty of options drawn from the previous editions as well as new ideas would have served the community much better, IMO.

Kane

 

[Henry]

There's a couple folks who don't own the PHB, they just print out the portions they want of the RSRD.

*raises hand*

Already bought the 3.0 PHB, DMG, and MM. Don't need to buy them again.

It's not in a designer's interest to cater exclusively to existing fans of a prior edition, because:

1) They're a small and almost always shrinking group.

2) They'll buy it anyway. Complain as they might, they'll buy it anyway.

Not me. I waited for the preview before I even looked, because all the reviews were saying the same thing I found when I looked for myself. I could be wrong, but it seems you're lumping in "rabid fans" with "fans." They really aren't the same - the fans will spread word-of-mouth and not buy it. The rabid fans will complain and buy it anyway, because it's D&D/Star Wars/Gamma World/Star Trek, and a little is better than none at all.

The "Wahoo" style wasn't a major part of the first two editions of GW and was touched on later to justify the sloppy design of a moribund list of stats tied to the MSH engine.

I beg to differ. Oh, how I beg. Metamorphosis Alpha had articles in the Strategic Review called "How Green is my Mutant?" First edition had pictures of intelligent plants reading books, Fat blubbery mutant animals with wings leaping over walls with tiny little wings, and part of the artifact treasure (besides the Blasters, Mark I through V) were things like rusted out cars, slot machines, and pool tables! It was surely juxtaposed with seriousness, but the elements of the absurd were there as well, just as it was with Gary's D&D (Blastum and Gutboy Barrelhouse, anyone?)

We're just seeing different things when we look at old Gamma World, that's all - but I would ask that you consider the people you're debating before you make generalizations, first. We've been around the RPG revolution, too.

 

[JoeBlank]

i routinely lend out my d02 books. ones i've never even opened.

For a man with a strong preference for the first incarnation of the game, I can say first hand that diaglo financially supports all versions, including the current one.

Joe "just saved $40 by borrowing two of diaglo's books and deciding against buying them" Blank