Not Reading Ryan Dancy

[SteveC]

But would it cause you to buy a new PHB every three years? Sure, it's updated, but you're forking over $30 for a little update from your previous $30 copy.

No, I can't handle buying new updated PHB, DMG, and MM1 every three years. Maybe every 5 to 6 years, but not 3 to 4 years. I'd drop D&D in favor of their other lines, even if that makes me an outcast of the D&D "in" crowd.

Hopefully this doesn't seem too tangental from the topic or Ryan's analysis, but yes, I'd pick up a new PHB, MM and DMG every three years if they took the best content from the splats and put them into the core rules. At the same time, if WotC took the material they put in the revisions into the SRD, then no one would actually need to buy them in order to keep playing. I mentioned several things that I think would make a new PHB a worthwhile investment for me, and as I think about it, using the new creature description format would make me buy a new MM as well. As far as the DMG goes, how about taking the luck rules from the new complete scoundrel and making them core? I think a lot of GMs would see the appeal to that right away.

All of this presupposes that there is a sizable amount of new rules content that comes out that is evolutionary for the current edition, and is also of high quality as well. It also supposes that the material is made available to the SRD. What makes the cut? Well, that's the decision for R&D to make back at WotC central. It's not too hard, however, to see the rules that have come out and really struck a chord with people over the last few years, and it's also a situation where there would be years of playtesting with these rules to see if any tweaks or changes were necessary before they made it into the core three rulebooks.

--Steve

 

[happyelf]

I think you are being elitist.

Any functional comunity must have standards.

A Disfunctional community is not the same as a group populated with some individuals with inept social skills.

Yes, but i've seen and heard enough to know that all too often the comunity is genuinly disdunctional. That is my point.

Seriously, this is par for the course in the RPG hobby. If you are going to put together an organization whose goal is to get a cross section of RPG hobbyists to come together and play you are going to end up getting a representative cross section of those playing the game... and it will include, very likely, a representative cross section of those in the hobby with bad socializing skills or habits.

And, if there arenot standards wich exclude the worst of these people, then that comunity will fail, or at the very least, fail to reach it's potential.

What is the RPGA supposed to do to "genuinely deal with that reality"? Create a crack squad of social-skill police? Forcibly ban anyone who doesn't bathe every day? Or doesn't wash their hair? Or doesn't use deodorant? Require new members take etiquette classes before being able to attend a convention?

Is it really so much to ask that people bathe regularly if they're going to turn up to a group activity?

Plus, any sufficiently large organization is going to have personality clashes regardless of social ability of members, and these clashes are more likely the sort of things that bring down clubs rather than just the random eccentric member.

Thoe clashes are part of what i'm talking about. A decent club or organisation needs to be able to deal wiht those issues, but all too often organisations of games do not, in part because they are unable or unwilling to deal with issues directly and constructivly.

I'm very understanding about having standards about who you will play with at your own table, but condemning a whole organization because its membership is open to all is elitist.

But nto inapropriate, particularly if, like the RPGA, the organisation has it's own tables. Will these tables be open to anyone? Even problem players? How many news players will remain in such an organisation if the tables it provides are always dominated by problem players?

Also, from the sound of it, some of your complaints are five years old at least. The RPGA's Living Campaigns ditched "player of the table" awards years ago.

I'm simply talking about examples i've heard, two of many. And frankly, ditching such an award may not be a good thing, depending on their reasons.

I've played in the RPGA's Living Greyhawk campaign since 2001. I have met some odious people I would never invite to my house to play. Far more, I have sat at scores tables with hundreds of the best role players in the hobby.

Not everyone has your personal tolerances, nor should they be expected to.

So, what you're saying is a game that lets GMs create their own MORPGs for their personal groups, sort of an RAD for tabletop RPGs. Say, the GM makes a scenario for Greyhawk Online, which has a bunch of locations and NPCs and items predeveloped. He makes a few extra NPCs and tweaks some others to fit his agenda, and sets up a few encounters. He then has his group create their characters, which uses a client that has a D20-based generation system with a visual representation and maybe a few personality traits added (many of the NPCs would be 'bots for ease of GMing, and extending that to the PCs lets a game continue with a missing player's character going as a bot); GURPS with pictures, perhaps.

Now, everyone logs into the server, which has some sort of MMORPG subscription service. Game play works something like RPGs over IRC/AIM/whatever chat system, but there is a visual representation of the game, with sound and actual spoken dialog (customized voices, not just customized pictures ... now everyone is a Real Roleplayer using a funny voice!), so you can actually see combat or NPCs, like a MMORPG. Some of the game can happen without GM input after he has used the electronic tools to create the scenario, so even he can go have a sandwich while everyone else is kicking butt.

(No, this isn't wholly spontaneous; I've been thinking about this for awhile.)

So what you're talking about is Neverwinter Nights, only it would be, say, NWN5 when we're currently up to number 2.

For those who don't know, NWN is the D&D computer game, complete with DM client, 3d map-modeling software, and so on. Only it's a real comptuer game, built on a buget, not a wish-list, so it's features are not perfect and the current version (the second) is still undergoing early patching.

 

[Mark CMG]

So, RyanD, you've predicted a new "revolutionary" hobby game segment, that will breakthrough in the $5 million tier in 2007. Has Mark CMG nailed it, or did you have something else specific in mind?

He has already refuted my contention within the bounds of particular vocabulary.

 

[kenobi65]

I just hear a lot wich suggests to me that it's dominated by powergamers and inclusive in a way wich ultimatly drives people away from it.

Well, I suppose that there are a fair number of them...but I'm certainly not, and most of the couple dozen folks I regularly play RPGA with aren't, either. On Robin Laws' continuum, I'd say that most of them are primarily Storytellers.

That said, I will certainly admit that there are RPGAers who want their characters to get as powerful as they can, as fast as they can. Do they "dominate" RPGA play? Not in my experience. I honestly don't encounter a lot of them, but if your tolerance for powergamers is zero, playing RPGA, particularly at a convention, probably isn't for you, because if you play long enough, you'll find some.

Help me understand what you mean by "inclusive in a way which ultimately drives people away from it?"

Then there's the unsubstantiated rumors. Like some guy in new zealand saying that he went to a meet and the guy who got player of the night was the guy who kept screaming "BOOYAH" whenever he rolled good. And there was some guy in Brisbane who refused to talk to women at his table. Stuff like that wich, while it could be dismissed, is passed around a bit too often to be disregarded entirely.

I, too, could give you a half-dozen stories about boorish or plain-old-jerk RPGA players I've encountered, too. But, that's out of 100 or so convention tables I've sat at, and another 200 or so online. I've played with many hundred different people, and I could probably count the jerks on both hands. Yes, the jerks stand out in your memory...but they are so the exception to the rule. If you have zero tolerance for jerks, too, then you probably shouldn't be playing with anyone you don't know, because you're going to run into a jerk every now and again.

Sure, a lot of it is common to clubs and conventions regardless of their afiliation, but that's the point- if you're going to have an RPGA, it has to do better than the norm, or better than the lower benchmark.

RPGA does have rules and penalties for truly offensive behavior. They've banned people for cheating, and I know there was one case where they issued a lifetime ban for assault. General boorishness or idiot behavior, unfortunately, is often in the eye of the beholder. The RPGA campaigns all have guidelines for ethical play, which include rules about "contribute to the fun of the whole group while playing", "play fairly and honestly", and "be considerate of others," but it's also up to the DM and the other players to speak up if they feel someone isn't respecting those rules. Does saying "Booyah!" too much really violate those?

Ultimately, you simply can't legislate angelic behavior. That'd be nice, but it's an unrealistic expectation in an "open" organization.

 

[AdmundfortGeographer]

Help me understand what you mean by "inclusive in a way which ultimately drives people away from it?"

I figured it was sorta like the old Yogi Berra quote: "It's so crowded no one goes there anymore."

 

[kenobi65]

I figured it was sorta like the old Yogi Berra quote: "It's so crowded no one goes there anymore."

Ahh, I think I get it now. I think this means "they let anyone in, including the jerks."

 

[AdmundfortGeographer]

And a tangentially related opinion of the matter would be summed up by Groucho Marx, "I refuse to join any club that would have me as a member."

 

[happyelf]

Help me understand what you mean by "inclusive in a way which ultimately drives people away from it?"

What i'm saying is that by setting the bar low for entry, any comunity or club then drives other people away who don't want to asociate with those who are allowed to enter. Sometimes this is snobbery, but in this hobby, all too often the worst people are the default status quo, because they aren't excluded or dealt with.

Then we have the seperate issue that, leaving aside value jugements, different people like different things at the table.

I, too, could give you a half-dozen stories about boorish or plain-old-jerk RPGA players I've encountered, too. But, that's out of 100 or so convention tables I've sat at, and another 200 or so online. I've played with many hundred different people, and I could probably count the jerks on both hands. Yes, the jerks stand out in your memory...but they are so the exception to the rule. If you have zero tolerance for jerks, too, then you probably shouldn't be playing with anyone you don't know, because you're going to run into a jerk every now and again.

I don't really have a problem with numbers of the sort you're stating. But, and i'm not speaking primarily of the RPGA here, I find that poor behaviour is often far more common, particularly in areas where it's not immediatly apparent because it has led to, for instance, an intert or defunct club, or a convention wich barely anyone in the area attends. Gamer comunities are almost always highly fragmented, and jerks play a big role in that.

RPGA does have rules and penalties for truly offensive behavior. They've banned people for cheating, and I know there was one case where they issued a lifetime ban for assault. General boorishness or idiot behavior, unfortunately, is often in the eye of the beholder. The RPGA campaigns all have guidelines for ethical play, which include rules about "contribute to the fun of the whole group while playing", "play fairly and honestly", and "be considerate of others," but it's also up to the DM and the other players to speak up if they feel someone isn't respecting those rules. Does saying "Booyah!" too much really violate those?

The 'booya' one was just a funny quote I read, although i'm pretty sure it was genuine and it does suggest that there's a lot of variation as to what play styles are encouraged.

Either way, the reality is that if any comunity in this hobby is going to succeed, rather than just limping along, it needs to realise that people have different standards for play and for behaviour, and needs to be on top of those issues in a very genuine way. Saying "ok guys let's all be nice" in general terms sounds fine on paper but in practice it doesn't help a comunity function when half the people at the table (or in the room) are going to get seriously turned off by stuff that the other half might not even realise is a problem. And that's to say nothing of actual jerks.

Ultimately, you simply can't legislate angelic behavior. That'd be nice, but it's an unrealistic expectation in an "open" organization.

I'm confident that if anyone wants to create a more functional model for comunities and clubs in this hobby, and particularly if they're planning to profit from it, they must accept these issues and work to address them.

 

[Melan]

That data is inaccurate. There was a year where more than 1 million D&D boxed sets were sold, but it wasn't 1989. 1979 is more like it. It was an exception to the trend. The data may be in error, or it might represent a 1 time mass market sale of some kind. The data we had from TSR's old computer system was inconclusive.

Ryan

Interesting! What would be your estimate for post-boom Basic D&D sales? Commentary from various designers and TSR staff points towards impressive figures, but apart from this Acaeum data, little in the way of exact figures.

 

[ashockney]

He has already refuted my contention within the bounds of particular vocabulary.

I meant more the "product" category itself, as opposed to his "role" with it.

Specifically your contention that the breakthrough product may be:

a new form of CRPG that more closely simulated a tabletop experience but divorced gaming from the requirement of a facilitator/DM.

When I read RyanD's original prediction, I envisioned a PVP/RPG (ala WoW) that could be run using bluetooth technology on handheld devices (such as the Nintendo DS or Sony PSP), and therefore create a CRPG that allowed for easy transportability between playing "solo" or playing in a PVP environment or playing AT a tabletop, but on a CRPG - still using a real life DM however, should you desire it.

So, I was curious to hear from RyanD what specifically he had in mind, or if this was just a wild assumption on the state of the gaming market based upon the overall condition today.