Shane Hensley comments on the RPG industry

[jasamcarl]

I can't see how anyone can argue against this. Even I hadn't seem this principle in action numerous times while I was working in the computer game industry, a designer who is motivated by purely mercenary reasons is less likely to spend the time playtesting the product than one who actually has a regular campaign and designs *and* plays with passion. And playtested products are, as a rule, more usable than unplaytested ones by an order of magnitude.

Svott Bennie

Um... i don't know, but maybe beacause they might have a MONTETARY INCENTIVE to do so knowing that investing in playtesting will show up in future sales through the credibility of the company.

 

[jasamcarl]

By refuting in this way, it appears that you're essentially claiming that the market isn't discerning enough to notice a difference in quality of work between those who are passionate and inspired in their attitude towards the game they are designing for versus those who are mercenary and resentful in their attitude towards it, and designing for it anyway.

I don't know whether it matters or not, but I suspect it does. Then again, Frank Herbert claims that he can't tell the difference in the quality of his writing during the times his muse was flowing and the times he was uninspired and found writing an utter chore. Maybe you're right, and with a professional designer, you couldn't tell the difference.

Was the FRCS book created by people who loved the setting? I assumed that the incredible quality of the work meant that it must have been created lovingly, but your assertion would bring that assumption into question.

Not quite. What i am saying is that INSPITE of those flaws, the products might still be worth more to them because they don't have to learn a new system to utilize them or integrate what good material there is in their campaign or even find players. From their point of view and for their purposes, the non d20 company could vary well be more 'flawed' or irrelevant; and that is pretty damn rational.

Of course, all these arguments are in the end rationaly motivated. Perhaps i should simply characterize them as disingenuous and self-serving?

 

[Inez Hull]

For mine, I'd really like to see Campaign 'stories' as opposed to Campaign 'settings'.

I've GM'ed several Homebrew worlds and have never had problems creating a viable setting. However, what would be really useful to me is an overall story arc to base a campaign on with enough detail in between to allow me to flesh things out. The mega-modules are OK although most have been a bit too site based for my tastes. I'm thinking more along the lines of the Freeport adventures, but presented as a single package, with campaign details to assist in making it the base of my story, rather than the world I base it in. The Enemy Within campaign for Warhammer would be a great example of what I'm looking for, only these type of products seem to be few and far between. I'll second the posters earlier who said they'd be willing to pay $100 for products like this.

 

[rounser]

What i am saying is that INSPITE of those flaws, the products might still be worth more to them because they don't have to learn a new system to utilize them or integrate what good material there is in their campaign or even find players.

Yes, though they may be at a quality disadvantage to those designers who are passionate about the game...though of course, the market will take care of that. As a consumer, I don't like the idea that the designer of the dungeon adventure that I just bought thinks that dungeons are banal*, and would much rather be designing something for Call of Cthulhu. Sometimes, there even seem to be tell tale signs in the finished product that this is the case.

That said, I suspect that the d20 publishers and designers who are most passionate about the game are probably also most likely to be the ones who have to watch themselves for self indulgence in the direction of their material, rather than catering directly to "what the market wants". Resultingly, it may well balance out!

In a similar vein: Monte Cook's comments on designers who write but don't play. Given his comments in this article, and, on another occasion, on back when he joined TSR and no-one there was playing the game, it seems that this horse bolted long ago.

*: I don't think dungeons in and of themselves are banal, but I do think that they can be written in such a manner.

 

[Pramas]

The emphasis you place on those flaws is overtly sentimental.

No,it isn't. It's called critical evaluation.

What I and the market consider a flaw is ego drive designers who place more emphasis on their artistic pretentions than providing the compatibility with the wide d20 user network.

So let me get this straight. Any product with a d20 logo is by default "valid" and worthy of purchase and use, no matter its quality. However, non-d20 games and products are by definition made by "ego driven designers"?

Please.

If they don't care about sales, fine; but to say their resentment is in anyway rational and implying that consumers, aren't, is quite frankly pathetic.

Where did I say consumers are irrational?

As for the issue of resentment, yes, again it is entirely rational. If you had worked really hard on something for years and years with little reward and you watched some no talent hack sweep in and become a success his first time out, you wouldn't feel a some resentment?

 

[hellbender]

Um... i don't know, but maybe beacause they might have a MONTETARY INCENTIVE to do so knowing that investing in playtesting will show up in future sales through the credibility of the company.

There are quite a few d20 products out there that were slapped out without playtesting, or if they were, there were very loose interpretations of the rules. But with a slap of gloss and some sharp pictures and a few handy ideas, they get by.

Not to sound offensive, but not everyone in business follows all the strictures and edicts that you seem to think they do. As irrational creatures, humans often make knee-jerk decisions and fly by the seats of their pants. There are a lot of prayers tossed in with the sweat and elbow grease. This is not to say that I am against d20 at all, I spend a lot of money on a lot of companies, and there are many companies out there with a proper understanding of the rules of engagment in this field and follow through by producing top-notch, useful and successful products. But you must also admit, there is some drek out there, and that contributes to the glut *in some areas*. Many retailers blindly order d20 because it is a hot ticket right now, and this could, just could, be taking up shelf space that other systems could be taking.

The d20 movement also helps non-d20 companies as well, some shops have increased the shelf space, maybe from seeing the sheer volume of rpg products out there. All in all, the d20/OGL movement I feel is beneficial in the long term, but in the short run, there will be some struggling, and some non-d20 companies might fold or have to convert. Adaption is one of the laws of the land.

hellbender

 

[Thorin Stoutfoot]

So let me get this straight. Any product with a d20 logo is by default "valid" and worthy of purchase and use, no matter its quality. However, non-d20 games and products are by definition made by "ego driven designers"?

Let me explain what I think Hellbender meant:

If I'm at the gaming store with $40 in my pocket, what would I get? Let's see. We have this game called "Godlike", and this game called "Nobilis"... But my chances of getting my D&D players to play either is slim.

On the other hand, Monte Cook has this cool new super-adventure called "The BaneWarrens", and the new event book (an entirely new concept) called "Requim for a God." The new issue of Dungeon has a d20 Mecha game, which I'm sure I could get my D&D group to try for at least one evening, and then there's "Spycraft", which a lot of folks have been raving about.

So the issue isn't that I have a choice between mediocre d20 products done by hacks or superior, inspired non-d20 products that have been sweated by geniuses with PhDs. The issue is that I have a choice between d20 products sweated on by geniuses, and non-d20 products sweated on by other maybe geniuses that I've never heard about.

It's no wonder d20 products outsell the others, given the same amount of design and presentation quality as the non-d20 products. I'm not saying that "Godlike" or "Nobilis" doesn't sell, but I bet that if there had been excellent implementations of such games (Note that I don't know if such a thing is even possible) as d20 games, they'd sell an order of magnitude better, simply because a potential buyer isn't thinking to himself/herself "Would this be a hard sell for my gaming group?". For this reason and this reason alone, I'd consider buying Spycraft, but not Nobilis. I'd consider "Mutants and Masterminds", but not "Godlike", and definitely not "SAS d20", which at this point everyone has agreed is the equivalent of a wolf in sheep's clothing.

In other words, my advice to John Nephew, for instance, would be to find someone who loves d20 and is a talented designer and loves Ars Magica (a certain person with the initials JT comes to mind , and get him to write the Ars Magica magic system as an extension to the d20 system. Advertise it as "the best new magic system to have ever been developed" (and if you manage to get JT to write it of course you should market the hell out of that!), and I bet that one new Core Rulebook will pay for 20 Ars Magica supplements!

 

[Dragonblade]

First of all, jasamcarl, chill out man!! If you disagree with something Pramas or someone else says you can do so without calling their assessment "pathetic". Present your opinion and we will evaluate it on its own merits as we will evaluate what Pramas and others have to say about the industry on their merits. We are all friends here.

--------------

Now, I do believe that we are in the middle of an RPG rebirth, so to speak. Some of have pointed out the success of HERO as proof that d20 doesn't glut the shelves. Well, I believe that the success of d20 actually drives HERO sales in part.

It was the renewed interest in RPG's fueled by d20 that is in part driving sales of HERO 5th. It is those gamers brought to d20 who are looking for something more or different that have gone and picked up HERO. Not to mention old HERO fans like me that heard about 5th Edition on a d20 website and bought it because of that.

Ryan Dancey himself, predicted this ages ago when d20 first came out and all the doom and gloomers were saying that d20 was designed to drive everyone out of business that wasn't d20. On the contrary, as Dancey predicted, d20 has served as a sort of benchmark that all game products and systems can be judged against thus helping the consumer find the diamonds amongst the coal.

In the old days, RPG systems were many and varied and whether one system was better than another was mostly personal opinion. That is still true to a large extent today but d20 has given us a measuring stick by which all RPG products can be objectively judged, even ones that aren't d20. WotC has set a certain standard for excellence and rules cohesiveness that a lot of d20 publishers are lately being judged by simply because there are so many products to choose from. Gamers are forced to become discriminating buyers to find the quality products amongst the chaff.

Those products that are found to be good are added to the list of "benchmark" products that other products are judged by. Over time this effect will result in consumer's growing familiarity and experience in being able to more quickly judge the quality and usefulness of a given product when they flip through it at the game store. Whereas before it might have taken them a read-through or playtest to arrive at the same opinion before the advent of d20.

This has begun to affect and will affect other RPG's as well. Consumers become better at evaluating the usefulness, rules, artwork, writing quality, etc. of other RPG products now that they have a growing baseline and benchmark with which they are already using to judge d20 products.

Other RPG systems that have a lot to offer in terms of overall quality will see their sales increased by d20 as gamers seek things d20 doesn't offer them. But those RPG systems that are not very good may very well see their sales dry up as consumers increasingly find d20 alternatives that are superior to their tired products.

The result is there will be a tightening of the market and the number of products out there. But the quality of RPG's as a whole will rise.

 

[Synicism]

Pramas, i have difficulty seeing the 'passion' in products. What i do see is balanced mechanics that i'm likely to use. Like shane, your argument is irrational.

And as to poor products surviving, why do you have trouble appreciating that they were valid products simply by virtue of being d20. Usability counts for as much as your creative sentiment of 'quality'.

If you can't see passion in a product, you haven't seen a really great book in far too long. Sure, RPG's are a business, but they're also an art. Someone with no passion for the game has no business producing one.

Example - AD&D 2nd Edition's Planescape. The setting is one of the single most well thought out, well written, cohesive game settings out there, especially considering the fact that it was a giant metasetting for all the AD&D game worlds. It was a work of art.

d20 example - Oathbound. A lot of what I said about Planescape applies to Oathbound as well. It's a fantastic book, despite the fact that it's crunch-light, and written with a lot of attention and care devoted to making it cohesive and believable.

Just because something is usable doesn't make it good. If you were building a house, would you build your load-bearing structures out of something that was merely usable? Or might you think about looking for something that was actually good?

There are things that work.

And there are things that work well.

 

[Synicism]

So the issue isn't that I have a choice between mediocre d20 products done by hacks or superior, inspired non-d20 products that have been sweated by geniuses with PhDs. The issue is that I have a choice between d20 products sweated on by geniuses, and non-d20 products sweated on by other maybe geniuses that I've never heard about.

So in other words, on some level, we have d20 books that sell because they're "good enough."

On another level, we have some books that make really good use of the system, within the limitations of its capabilities.

And on a third level, we have some games with systems custom-tailored for the specifics of the game.

Do I like D&D? Yeah. It's fun. Do I like it for everything? Not particularly. Sometimes, I want to play Shadowrun. The Shadowrun system is designed for Shadowrun. It works great for Shadowrun. If I want to play Shadowrun, I'll play Shadowrun. Not GURPS Shadowrun or d20 Shadowrun or HERO Shadowrun.

Sometimes, I want to play Deadlands. I'll play Deadlands. The problem with d20 Deadlands has nothing to do with the attitude that Shane Hensley or anyone else had about d20 or their knowledge of the system. The problem with d20 Deadlands is the following:

Two gunfighters face each other down at high noon. They draw. The Man in White draws faster and plugs the Man in Black right between the eyes.

Man in Black: "Owww! That really hurt! I only have 40 hit points left! You're in trouble now!"

Kind of the same reason Legend of the Five Rings loses something in the d20 translation, despite the fact that OA and Rokugan are some of the best written d20 books I've ever seen.

When two Samurai face off in an iaijutsu duel, one stays up and the other one dies. The L5R system dealt with this pretty well. d20, quite frankly, doesn't.

Samurai 1: My honor has been avenged. My skill is superior.

Samurai 2: Damn! That really hurt! I've only got 80 HP left! Oh, you are SOOO toast.

Samurai 1: Uh...

You get the idea. Some systems are tailor-made to handle certain kinds of games. As "valid" as a d20 take on them may be, it's limited by the "versatility" that presumably has been built into the system (a totally different debate).