How do you define "Heartbreaker?"

[Willie the Duck]

My point is that people use the term wrong. They use it to derogatorily describe small d20-based games, and that’s not what the term originally meant.

I don't know how much original intent matters in this case. Edwards' article was somewhat influential to perpetually online gamerdom back in 2002. Now? Whatever people think it means, it probably means.

That said, I don't know that there is a lot of consistency there. I think some people do use it derogatorily. Others I think think it means 'RPG relatively similar to D&D' because the salient point they took away was someone wanted to create 'D&D, but with _______.' Others seem not to focus on the D&D-ness, and use it to mean 'labor of love RPG project.' Like my homebrew system that I'll get around to finishing 'someday' -- it has nothing to do with D&D (over other TTRPGs), but to some, it's a heartbreaker.

 

[soviet]

I don't know how much original intent matters in this case. Edwards' article was somewhat influential to perpetually online gamerdom back in 2002. Now? Whatever people think it means, it probably means.

Absolutely not. People can be wrong.

That said, I don't know that there is a lot of consistency there. I think some people do use it derogatorily. Others I think think it means 'RPG relatively similar to D&D' because the salient point they took away was someone wanted to create 'D&D, but with _______.' Others seem not to focus on the D&D-ness, and use it to mean 'labor of love RPG project.' Like my homebrew system that I'll get around to finishing 'someday' -- it has nothing to do with D&D (over other TTRPGs), but to some, it's a heartbreaker.

I've seen it used deliberately loosely, like describing one's own project as a heartbreaker. This isn't rejecting the meaning of the term so much as it is being postmodern. I don't think a heartbreaker necessarily has to be "D&D but _', it's just that D&D is the only game people otherwise outside the hobby are likely to have come across. It would be hard to write a Runequest or Rolemaster heartbreaker because to get to those things you already have to have been exposed to the wider field.

 

[Reynard]

Terminology drift is certainly a thing, so it makes sense to ask what "Heartbreaker" means to individuals rather than what the original or official definition is.

I do think that it has long been used as a derogatory term, even if that was not Edwards' intent from the beginning. Mostly because people like being derogatory on the internet.

It is interesting how, if you are using the original definition, the biggest element that killed Heartbreakers is crowd funding: one no longer prints up 1000 hardback books with hopes of selling them on the con floor.

 

[KYRON45]

I think its used as if to say this is the next big thing and I liked it before it was cool. But i'm almost always wrong.

 

[Evaniel]

I think its used as if to say this is the next big thing and I liked it before it was cool. But i'm almost always wrong.

And as someone kind of unfamiliar with the term but seeing it a lot lately, this was the sense that I had, too. But I would then see it talked about it in other, more unflattering ways. This thread is helping me see why!

 

[Blue]

To me, a "Fantasy Heartbreaker" (and that first word is important) is designed "I can do D&D, but better". Basically something that shares the same design space as D&D, and would be a direct competor if published, as opposed to something like a fantasy PbtA game which has a distinct play style that attracts different types of gamers.

I have seen it used in a derogatory way often, usually implying the author is only familiar with D&D and similar systems and missing lots of potential in the RPG industry at large as well as having a narrower experience from which to design. Those often range from very heavily houseruled D&D plus terminology changes to games that replace a lot but with the same thing like "we have different ability scores!".

Used in a non-derogatory way, my favorite D&D-like game, 13th Age, I could easily described as a Fantasy Heartbreaker. However the term also occasionally carries with it a more amateur or small-scale vibe so others might debate that.

Pathfinder 1e on the other hand I personally wouldn't describe as a Fantasy Heartbreaker and I had to delve a bit into my feelings to figure out why. Again, you asked about personal descriptions, and for me PF was more of a continuation of 3.5 that expanded then a rework. And by the current day it's no longer trying to be "D&D but better", it's trying to be "The Next Edition of Pathfinder" which had grown so much over the intervening time it's absolutely it's own thing. But if someone argued PF1 was a Fantasy Heartbreaker I don't know that I could muster much ammunition to disagree.

 

[...m...]

...my interpretation may deviate from more-common derogatory usage, but i've always read fantasy heartbreaker as an intensely-personal creative endeavor which simultaneously shines brilliantly and fails to land on account of the narrow vision driving its creation; its lost potential breaks both the creator's heart for failing to find a sustainable audience and the audience's heart for failing to manifest a sustainable creation...

...it's both hubris and catharsis embodied in a tragically mis-spent RPG effort...

 

[TiQuinn]

I've seen this term used a lot lately, but I don't have a clear sense of how people define it, and I suspect that this has led to some talking past one another. I'm curious how you personally define this term.

My understanding of the term is when someone sees failings or issues with a TTRPG, usually D&D, and tries to create a new system that is predicated on fixing those issues rather than having a design ethos that is independent of the original game. It’s akin to taking a bunch of house rules and saying “I have enough rules here that I think I can make my own system.”

 

[soviet]

I think part of what makes something a heartbreaker is that they are derivative of D&D unconsciously. They didn't see the wider possibilities. Games like 13th Age, Pathfinder, Dungeon World, OSR, all knowingly try to emulate and build on D&D's tropes. They aren't trying to be 'not D&D' they are trying to be 'D&D plus X' or 'D&D minus X'.

 

[TwoSix]

I tend to think of "heartbreakers" as an 80s and 90s concept; they're typically rooted in a GM's belief that D&D is too "gamist", and the real fix for D&D is more detailed rules around the areas the specific creator finds to have insufficient verisimilitude.