Is a popular non-D&D traditional fantasy RPG possible?

[Jürgen Hubert]

I think the Warhammer FRP is as successful as it can get without being D&D. It is hugely successful, has a large number of supplements, and rather large fan base. It also helps that its approach to characters and character advancement is radically different to D&D.

 

[rounser]

I say "Fantasy Heartbreaker" because I can't think of any better way to describe the mentality that would bring something like that out.

IMO, it's un-self-explanatory Forgespeak with no reason for existing except that people think they sound clever by using it.

Why not call it what it is, a "D&D clone"? Or, failing that, "fantasy RPG" or "swords & sorcery RPG"? That's what these games are. Add "failed" or "unsuccessful" to describe their chance of success if that's what you mean.

Forge jargon use doesn't make you cool, it's pretentious and annoying IMO. I mean, small businesses fail all the time too. May as well call failed small businesses a "retail heartbreaker", only people don't, because that would be silly and confusing.

 

[tenkar]

I think the Warhammer FRP is as successful as it can get without being D&D. It is hugely successful, has a large number of supplements, and rather large fan base. It also helps that its approach to characters and character advancement is radically different to D&D.

So successful that Games Workshop farmed it and it's sibling (40k) out to a third party? It might be popular (apparently more so in Europe then in the US) but the profits apparently weren't there.

Yes, I know Dark Heresy sold out immediately (i own it and play in a weekly campaign). I still have my original 1st edition WFRP, most of the original supplements and some of the new stuff Green Ronin helped put out. Still. if this is the yardstick one measures success against it isnt much.

 

[Barastrondo]

No, it's un-self-explanatory Forgespeak with no reason for existing except that people think they sound clever by using it.

Why not call it what it is, a "D&D clone"? That's what these games are.

Not all of 'em are clones. This one might be, but the general term isn't about how similar the mechanics are or aren't to D&D, it's about the hope of converting a large audience and the trouble of finding that it wasn't that large. Since the topic was exactly about an audience so large that it becomes the new "number two," the term seems considerably appropriate — we're talking about the odds of success here, not just whether or not it can look like D&D. It being a clone is a given.

Can't say I learned the phrase from the Forge, either. There are some folks who... don't like my kind there.

(Though it was fun when the Evil Hat guys encouraged me to go sign up for a demo of Sorcerer at Gen Con. They said when I sat down in front of Ron Edwards, the convention would implode and they wouldn't have to pack up for the return trip.)

 

[rounser]

Not all of 'em are clones.

Then call them unsuccessful fantasy RPGs, then. That's plain english, rather than Forge pseudo-intellectual code (and yes, the term does originate there).

It might be a bit hard to think of it that way because the paths seem to have diverged in terms of genre, but WHFRP is pretty clearly a D&D clone if you stop to think about the conceits and assumptions they share. Ars Magicka could be accused of being a D&D clone as well, from a certain frame of reference.

They're both D&D taken in different thematic directions, but the bones and underlying assumptions of both games are arguably quite clearly Arnesonian and Gygaxian, IMO (stuff like here are the spells, here are the magic items, here are the monsters, here's the group of characters who go around belting them etc).

In fact, Ars Magicka and WHFRP now arguably resemble older editions of D&D more than 4E does, purely because of their spell lists and assumptions of wizard utility being so broad. They're also both a lot closer to medieval themes, something that D&D could do but didn't specialise in. 4E is going to great pains to be anything but thematically medieval, seemingly, and can no longer even pretend to do it IMO.

 

[Steely Dan]

If I were a game designer I'd seriously consider putting together a fantasy RPG that just might carve a chunk out of D&D's market share. Given the questionable popularity of 4E--at least relative to the initial popularity of 3E--and considering that it seems geared more towards a younger/new crowd, I would think that a very well-done traditional fantasy game




p.s. Could this be Pathfinder?

Ah, more thinly veiled passive-aggression/insults – yay….



p.s. A band-aid isn't so hot for a massive head wound.

 

[Jürgen Hubert]

So successful that Games Workshop farmed it and it's sibling (40k) out to a third party? It might be popular (apparently more so in Europe then in the US) but the profits apparently weren't there.

Yes, I know Dark Heresy sold out immediately (i own it and play in a weekly campaign). I still have my original 1st edition WFRP, most of the original supplements and some of the new stuff Green Ronin helped put out. Still. if this is the yardstick one measures success against it isnt much.

As far as I know, the profits were there. It's just that Games Workshop calculated that they could make more money for the same amount of effort by publishing more models.

Consider this: If Wizards of the Coast only had a limited pool of editors and quality control people for both their Dungeons & Dragons books and their Collectible Card Games, which one do you think they would ditch first?

 

[Dr. Strangemonkey]

Then call them unsuccessful fantasy RPGs, then. That's plain english, rather than Forge pseudo-intellectual code (and yes, the term does originate there).

Ya know, there's nothing I love better than calls for plain English. It can double for populism or elitist xenophobia it's got a thousand and one uses! It's the best sort of pseudo-anti-intellectual code.

Certainly, I can understand having a problem with a specific term, but let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater by arguing for the impoverishment of the language of Shakespeare in order to fight the supposed snobbery of the Forge.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Ya know, there's nothing I love better than calls for plain English. It can double for populism or elitist xenophobia it's got a thousand and one uses! It's the best sort of pseudo-anti-intellectual code.

Certainly, I can understand having a problem with a specific term, but let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater by arguing for the impoverishment of the language of Shakespeare in order to fight the supposed snobbery of the Forge.

Wasn't Shakespeare himself eager to add new words to our vocabulary?

Though I am not sure "Fantasy Heartbreaker" work as well as his inventions...

 

[Mercurius]

Ah, more thinly veiled passive-aggression/insults – yay….

???? That is a major projection, Mr. Dan. I'd advise against taking offense or seeing insult when none was intended...or at least find out first before insulting someone by accusing them of passive aggression!