Monte's secret project confirmed

[smetzger]

So is this how its going to be from now on every time WoTC does anything even remotely similar to a D20 comapny they are going to be accused of copying sombody.

First of all there is only so many topics out there.Second WoTC take two years to put out a product some of the D20 comapnies can do it 6 months and finally The Evil book was hardly up to the standards of WoTC and Monte Cook.

So saying they are copying Evil is ridiculous.

Well, when you publish feats that have been previously published under the OGL and you don't give the author credit then yes. Did you look even look at the other book to see what OGL you could re-use? I bet you didn't.

There are a couple of feats that were in the Netbook of feats way before WOTC did Masters of the Wild. And yes your time to market is a bit slow, but the time to market for NBoF is also slow (I submitted a feat on 7/13/01 and it hasn't even been reviewed yet). I also find it distasteful that WOTC employees are encouraged to actively turn a blind eye to what other companies have already done. Thus insulating themselves from any copyright issues. Instead they should be encouraged to do a little reasearch and be aware of what OGL stuff is out there and then re-use it.

*:> Scott

 

[drnuncheon]

The rules on drugs have been an absolute hit in my Realms campaign... From Thayan merchants to subversive sects and religions, my players are frequently tested with temptations from these areas... And when going against a dragon or equally powerful foe, who wouldn't want a cheap, easily accessible, easily replaceable power boost?

Being as I run a "cop" game, drugs are also definitely part of the background at least, if not in the forefront. In fact, one plotline I handled was essentially huting down a drug dealer: a gnomish alchemit was testing his formula for skill-enhancing potions, trying to lower the cost.

It worked - but they were also addictive and had some nasty side effects. When you tried to do your work when not under the influence, you got frustrated that you weren't able to reach the same level of expertise. Frustrated to the point of berserk rage.

The alchemist is gone, but the formulas are still out there somewhere...

Anyway, my biggest problem with drug rules in any game is that they seem to have all fallen into the "cyberpunk" mentality - 90% of them seem to have a positive game-mechanical effect (stat boosts, etc). Where are the drugs that just make you 'feel good' and forget how lousy your life is? Those would be the big sellers, not the ones that give you extra running speed.

J

 

[Horacio]

Anyway, my biggest problem with drug rules in any game is that they seem to have all fallen into the "cyberpunk" mentality - 90% of them seem to have a positive game-mechanical effect (stat boosts, etc). Where are the drugs that just make you 'feel good' and forget how lousy your life is? Those would be the big sellers, not the ones that give you extra running speed.

J

But the problem is meta-gaming knoledge. If players knowthat the drug has a potential nocive effect, and the drug doesn't give them any tangible gaming effect a.k.a. stat boost, their characters won't approach the drug even with a 10 ft. pole...

 

[Harlequin]

...

I was generalising and trying to make a point that the goody too shoes of this world are trying to ruin the good crunchy nasty fun for the rest of us and you jumped in and took it as a personal attack on yourself...thats cool

Thats the internet for you

Thanks to those that want to educate me in Hypocrisy
I appreciate it but i see it so many times daily on the net it needs no explanation...


Harlequin

 

[Desdichado]

Call me conservative, a prude, whatever; flame away as much as you like, but converting utter depravity into "crunchy bits" just doesn't seem right.

I am conservative. Very conservative. But I think this could be a great addition for a number of gamers out there. Not only that, this is the kind of stuff the original game either had or hinted at, as well as the game's source material.

I don't want semi-intelligent tumours for familiars, I don't want rules for human sacrifice and the selling of souls... all that just strikes me as sick.

Isn't that the point? This is for the villains, after all. If they're not obviously evil, that kinda invalidates one of the game's main objectives.

And, yes, I know it's a game, that it already involves magic and the creatures of the outer planes and all that is evil, but this new book seems to be taking things to an extreme that I don't feel comfortable with.

That's quite a claim. Unless advance copies in Singapore have suddenly appeared monthes ahead of schedule, you have no idea how far or how extreme the book goes. I doubt it goes any farther than your standard R.E. Howard Conan story, but maybe that's just me.

I also don't think that it is in the best interests of the industry for the market leader to be producing something so apparently beyond the bounds of normal decency as this appears it is going to be.

Again, since you have no idea where this product falls relative to the "bounds of normal decency" that's quite a claim to make. Borderline slanderous, in fact. I personally think that the worst interests of the industry include rehashing the same ideas that we've done for the last twenty-five or so years. Going off the deep end in titillating debauchery is hardly the way to break that trend (I did mention I was conservative, right?) but we have no evidence that indeed the Book of Vile Evil does such a thing.

PS: I also know that the opinions expressed above are neither popular nor necessarily welcome but I am simply expressing my opinion.

I'm sure they're not. I've bitten my tongue about a lot of things on this thread so far. Depending on the content of this book, I may agree with you, in fact. However, I don't think that will actually happen. I have no problem with an unpopular opinion on the subject, as I have one myself, but in this case, your opinion is reactionary and uninformed. You simply don't have much of anything to judge this by, so condemning it already is --at best-- premature.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

Ah... I get it. You're like those people who expect musical groups to keep rehashing the same stuff forever and accuse them of "selling out" if they alter or develop the formula even one iota. Check.

- Sir Bob.

I don't think so! I just know what I like.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

Do the math: 2002 - 1983 = 19 years. 10 years = 1 decade. 19 years = 1.9 decades, or roughly 2.

Ok...so what was the point of this post? I said the two decades thing was on the mark.

 

[drnuncheon]

But the problem is meta-gaming knoledge. If players knowthat the drug has a potential nocive effect, and the drug doesn't give them any tangible gaming effect a.k.a. stat boost, their characters won't approach the drug even with a 10 ft. pole...

I guess I don't see getting the PCs to use them as being the purpose of having drugs in the game, that's all. If that was my purpose, I agree - having positive game effect is a good thing.

But for my purposes, the fewer positive effects, the better. I'm kind of conservative, I don't want to be portraying things like drug use in a positive light. I want the nastiest, meanest, wretchedest drugs you can think of so that my players can feel good about kicking righteous butt when they encounter people dealing them.

J

 

[Petrosian]

Actually, This seems to be a PLAYER problem.

My sorcerer in the faerun game is an artist sorcerer tpye, complete with emotional reactions and artistic insight (read lack of sense) on occasion. At a couple of points in the game when deailing with "alchemists, herbalistsm potioneers, etc) he has inquired about "recreational" items. i did not plan from theb get go for him to indulge in recreational drugs on occasion, but it sort of fit when things got stressful now and again, given my slightly hedonistic bent with his character.

Unfortunately, so far my Gm seems to be thinking "shops sell things adventurers want" game mechanic wise so none have had anything. this is something i will discuss later with him if it continues.


So, THIS player, would indeed be amenable to having my character possibly use drugs for NON-COMBA purposes which could have addiction chances.

DISCLAIMER: i don't use drugs, don't recommend drug use and the fact that i play a character who will use them is not to be taken as an endorsement of the practice in real life. Similarly, my fighter will often charge a mystical beasty, which likewise, i do not see as an endorsement to do so in real life.

But the problem is meta-gaming knoledge. If players knowthat the drug has a potential nocive effect, and the drug doesn't give them any tangible gaming effect a.k.a. stat boost, their characters won't approach the drug even with a 10 ft. pole...

 

[Petrosian]

Apologies if this has been said already...

WOTC publishing a book on EVIl or extra rage feats for the barb, when others have done so is not copying.

There are a fairly numerous collection of "obvious expansions or extensions" of current work. getting a book of "obvious duh huh" stuff out before someone else does an 'official one" does not earn you the right to claim "i was copied."

Getting something unique and original might very well though.

Just my 2 cents...