Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chiaroscuro23" data-source="post: 2503428" data-attributes="member: 15371">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.</blockquote>

Verification