Review of Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay

[MonsterMash]

More generally, I'm not sure what your point is. That article is laughably inaccurate in many of its claims (5000 RPG players worldwide -- including D&D?!). A bad article was published in WD -- big deal.

The fact of WFRP's past and current success is not affected by it.

So we've all registered on average six times at ENWorld then (5k x 6 = 30k, approx ENWorld membership).

GW probably sold more copies of 1e AD&D PHB in the first year of its release than that. On anecdotal evidence WHFRP is selling well, oddly enough in the UK GW do not sell it from their own stores which might be providing a nice little boost to the other games stores. You are right in saying there is a bit of any RP feeling with some at GW, after all you don't need to buy lots and lots of minis to roleplay....

but the review does not signal that the sky is falling...

We have 4edition threads for that!

 

[Jonny Nexus]

Jonny: I do not dispute your right to dislike the review and anything I have wrote has not touched on your points because I do not disagree with them. I like the review because it gives me a reference point to understand Warhammer. Without the review, I would have ignored Warhammer because I hate to learn new systems. By showing how similiar things between the two systems are, the review made Warhammer palatable and significantly increased my likelihood to buy it.

The people are disagree with are the people who obviously do not like D&D/d20, hate that the review compared the two systems, and are mad that any comparison can be made.

And who precisely are they? As fair as I recall, most (perhaps all) of the people you disagree with have repeatedly said that they have no beef against D&D, and in many cases are fans of it.

I agree that Dancey could have chosen a better style and format for his review and certainly could have chosen his words better, but the review does not signal that the sky is falling and I think it will have a positive effect on people who know nothing about Warhammer, even if the Warhammer fans want to draw and quarter Dancey because he dared sully the name of Warhammer with D&D.

But if you didn't want to know why people like me were offended by the review, why did you ask? (Especially, when we'd already answered that question, multiple times). And when I did take the time to answer your question, did you not think that it would be courtious to reply, if only to thank me?

The impression I got was that when you said, "I still do not see why so many people are "offended" by the review" it was not meant as any kind of question, to which you desired an answer, but as a rhetorical statement proclaiming what you felt to be the illogicality of those who were offended by the review.

I cannot understand why you say that you do not disagree with my points when I have been pubically disagreeing with you, such as when you claimed that the review would have a benefit for WFRP:

If anything, he wrote a review targeted to the D&D crowd that will make them look at the game rather than just dismiss it. A lot of people will not touch anything that does not have a d20 label. By showing fans of D&D how Warhammer is mechanically similiar, he is giving a de facto boost to the image of Warhammer.

...and I replied by saying that it didn't matter if it gave a sales boost to WFRP because that still didn't make what he said acceptable:

It's a bit like someone "reviewing" a novel by saying, "XXXX is a very good novel, which is not surprising because it is largely derived from the novel YYYY, which I wrote some years ago". If - in that example - it turned out that the novel XXXX was not in any way derived from the novel YYYY, the author of XXXX - and his or her supporters - would rightly be very aggrieved. Defending the actions of the "reviewer" by saying that his actions were likely to encourage people who'd read and enjoyed YYYY to go out and read XXXX would, in my opinion, be somewhat missing the point.

You can't have agreed with what I was saying because I was totally disputing your point.

Moreover, you keep on using dismissive, sarcastic and near-abusive language to describe fans of WFRP (I count myself among their number), such as:

and I think it will have a positive effect on people who know nothing about Warhammer, even if the Warhammer fans want to draw and quarter Dancey because he dared sully the name of Warhammer with D&D.

...and:

They're all mad because it was compared to D%D 3e. Warhammer is too pure a game to be sullied with the name of D&D. It is a very elitist attitude

...and:

To me, this is a very elitist attitude.

...and:

Fan: "It says the game is like D&D!? Get my pitchfork and torch."

...and:

Yes, because 3e is the devil!

...and:

It is the undercurrent of anti-d20 elitism that gets on my nerves. (And the RPGnet thread is anything but a civil argument.)

Yet, compare a game to D&D, the game that the senseless masses play, and you get to sit back and watch the flamefest.

...and:

It is the people who're acting offended that I rail against.

Hint: Saying that we are *acting* offended implies that we're lying when we say that we're offended (i.e. that we are faking it for some reason).

Anyhow, I've now pretty much come to the conclusion that you're just trolling in an attempt to wind up WFRP fans up, so I'm going to stop replying to your posts.

 

[Chiaroscuro23]

I think it's obvious to most people that calling one piece of artwork derivative of another is insulting. Creativity in art is the expectation in Western culture. Even art that is based on something previous is labelled with a different word when the speaker wants to give a positive impression--it's called pastiche, homage, a remake, a sequel, &c.

There's a similar issue with RPGs. Creativity is expected. Definitely in the fluff, but also in the crunch. Some folks think it's foolish that each new system needs a new dice mechanic, or even new subsystems, if they're not significantly different or especially evocative of the setting. (Especially within d20, I think there's a feeling that it's a shame that the "best" way to do, say, a madness system didn't catch on, and instead everybody's got to do their own.) But a level of creativity is expected. Saying a game is derivative of an earlier game suggests a lack of creativity.

Ryan has said that he intended "derivative" as a compliment, not an insult. I think that's strange, but don't see any reason not to believe him. I can see two likely explanations:

1. Ryan's a businessman (apparently fairly successful when at WotC) and not an artist, so he just doesn't think things like I've layed out above. This seems kind of likely to me, especially given his comments about learning new systems being a "tax" on players. It suggests the efficiency-above-all attitude I'm used to in business and among some legal scholars. I think it's foolish in some ways, though, since sometimes efficiency isn't the point. Just as diversity in people can be celebrated despite the difficulties of learning new cultures and languages, diversity in games can be valuable because people want different types of games. Of course, humans have value on their own and games only do as tools, so it's an imperfect analogy.

2. Ryan is just lying; he's being disingenuous and attempting to hurt WHFRP or help d20 for his own reasons. I see no reason to think this, though it seems clear that eyebeams and others do. Benefit of the doubt and all that.

Since I have no connection to WHFRP, I'm not much insulted by the derivative comment, though I would be insulted by some of the unfavorable comments about d20 that internet trolls are fond of making. As my father likes to say, it depends on whose ox is getting gored. That said, the response has been unecessarily vituperative, and since Ryan's changed the beginning of his review, I see no major harm.

Cheers,
C.

 

[Belen]

Anyhow, I've now pretty much come to the conclusion that you're just trolling in an attempt to wind up WFRP fans up, so I'm going to stop replying to your posts.

Of course you call me a troll. I am not saying what you want to hear. Excuse me if I do not go through the entire thread just to argue with you. You see it as a negative review. I see it as a positive review.

There is no debate as we obviously will have to agree to disagree on this point.

 

[Jonny Nexus]

Of course you call me a troll. I am not saying what you want to hear. Excuse me if I do not go through the entire thread just to argue with you. You see it as a negative review. I see it as a positive review.

There is no debate as we obviously will have to agree to disagree on this point.

<sarcasm>But I thought the reason you weren't answering my posts was because you didn't disagree with the points I'd been making?</sarcasm>

anything I have wrote has not touched on your points because I do not disagree with them.

 

[Barak]

I -always- follow -all- advice from -all- advice columns I read. I hate to think.

To get back on topic, I think it's rather telling that virtually (I'd say -all-, but I'm not sure) everyone who is familiar with WFRP disagree in big parts with the review, and believe it's incorrect on many points, and that virtually (see above parenthesis) everyone who isn't familiar think it's a favorable review, and "helps" sell WFRP.

I also believe that it shows, despite claims to the contrary, that other than reading the new edition, Mr Dancey isn't very familiar with WFRP, or it's history. Given both that, I have little problem believing he (Mr Dancey) doesn't see what the uproar is about. After all, everyone not familiar with WFRP seems to view the review the same way he does. It's just that anyone with some understanding of the way WFRP works, and has worked, view it as bad, because due to experience, understand that it's erroneous. But that takes experience -playing- the game, and not just reading the rulebook.

Long live the Queen!

 

[Professor Phobos]

I don't know how Green Ronin/Black Industries pulled it off, but I've been able to find every Warhammer FRP book at my local Barnes and Noble or Borders, which is fantastic. Normally that kind of bookstore would only have WoD and D&D stuff, and I'd have to take a trip to a game store/order online to get anything else. (Which I'm cool with, mind, but, still...)

 

[Spell]

Apologies if I'm being unfair here, but you only seem to reply to people who are slamming D&D.

just leave him alone. some people enjoy themselves with little...
even if this thread has very little to do with the review anymore, why following any attempt to turn it into a flame war? if nothing else, some of the posts were interesting for people who were looking for more information on warhammer.
if this guy doesn't even realise how partronising and narrow minded his behaviour looks, what's the good of point that out to him? he won't listen to you anyway!

 

[Jonny Nexus]

just leave him alone. some people enjoy themselves with little...
even if this thread has very little to do with the review anymore, why following any attempt to turn it into a flame war? if nothing else, some of the posts were interesting for people who were looking for more information on warhammer.
if this guy doesn't even realise how partronising and narrow minded he is looking (or being... i'll leave you the power to judge by yourself...), what's the good of point that out to him? he won't listen to you anyway!

It's okay, it's okay! I'm going! I'm walking!

(...walking in a looking back over my shoulder kind of way, admittedly).

 

[Jonny Nexus]

I don't know how Green Ronin/Black Industries pulled it off, but I've been able to find every Warhammer FRP book at my local Barnes and Noble or Borders, which is fantastic. Normally that kind of bookstore would only have WoD and D&D stuff, and I'd have to take a trip to a game store/order online to get anything else. (Which I'm cool with, mind, but, still...)

Could it be (just guessing here) that they sell a lot of Warhammer novels, which might then give them good contacts/influence/leverage at conventional book shops?

(In the same way that White Wolf and WoC also sell lots of novels in conventional book shops).