Shane Hensley comments on the RPG industry

[Umbran]

And taking a few levels of fighter really really hurts a mage in the long run.

From my experience as a long-time Shadowrun player, though, a Mage in Shadowrun who really tries to be as good as the "fighter-types" also gets hurt. Mages in Shadowrun have more to suck down XP than anyone else in the game. If they spend it on non-magic, they retard their growth as mages. And, even if they do spend the XP, they still really aren't as good as the fighters - to be as good, they'd need cyberware. And if they take that cyberware, they really, really retard their growth as mages.

So, on that basis, D&D and Shadowrun are prety similar, IMHO.

MInd you, I'd still not be interested in a d20 Shadowrun. As others have noted, while game settings are important, game mechanics are, too. If you change the root mechanic, you'd have a different game.

 

[whisper_jeff]

Feats; feats are a very well defined d20 mechanic that fits easily into a supers game but aren't in a standard game of d20 SAS.

Skills; Well technically that's not a mechanic but rather a set of options, but why not use the d20 standard set of skills instead of the tristat ones. I know you don't have problems with people using the d20 non-combat skills instead of the SAS ones but they should be standard, and I feel this is indicative.

Ok, I recognize that a _LOT_ of people feel that feats are a core part of d20. I disagree. They are a cool extension of the system, but they are not vital to the system. The game does not break down without feats. You can play D&D and completely remove feats from the game. It loses some of its _power_ but not its mechanical effectiveness. Fine, a fighter can't cleave a group of targets any more, but he can still swing a sword and kill an orc. Feats just take the game environment to the next level.

SAS d20 has rules that similarly allow taking the game to the next level (Attributes). Also, adding feats to SAS d20 is effortless (and in hindsight, I wish I had included the Attribute). 1 Power Point gives you one feat (except Leadership which is covered by other Attributes in the game). The character still needs to fulfill the feats requirements in order to take it. Simple. Easy. Yes, I should have added it to the book and I'm kicking myself that I didn't since feats seems to be one of the key things that people focus on when contesting that SAS d20 is not a d20 game...

As for skills, we have them. Fine, the list is different, but how hard is it to say "we're using the D&D list of skills plus the SAS d20 combat skill." Also, the mechanics for the skills are identical to traditional d20 with a couple of additions (specializations and combat skills).

The six basic attributes, classes, feats, skills, and d20 task resolution.

And most importantly, the mechanic of levelling up, with an attendant increase in attributes, classes, feats, skills, and bonuses to d20 task resolution.

Six basic ability scores? Got them. Classes? Have them too. Feats? See above. Skills? Have them (see above caveat). d20 task resolution? Have that too. Levelling up? Have that as well.

Thus, considering SAS d20 has all the elements (except feats, though adding them is effortless), why do you contest that SAS d20 isn't a d20 game? I can use Monster Manual creatures in an SAS d20 game with less than two minutes of conversions (due to armour being treated as Damage Reduction rather than an AC bonus and other minor tweaks). Would that not constitute a d20 game - being able to use other d20 material due to a similar base game mechanic?

And as a note, I'm seriously curious about your answers to this. I've heard that SAS d20 is not a d20 game often enough but I simply fail to see how it isn't. It isn't packaged like D&D in Tights, but it is a d20 game. The mechanics are the same. Character creation is different. Once you're done creating your character, however, game play is virtually identical to d20 (with exceptions that are obvious changes for a superhero game - such as the addition of a knockback mechanic and the removal of AOO). The _game mechanics_ are the same.

Since we plan on doing more d20 material (Slayers d20, BESM d20, d20 Mecha, plus several others that we have yet to announce), I want to know your (collective) thoughts on it. I may not agree (duh! <grin>), but it is helpful. Some products we have planned (Slayers d20) are going to be much more traditional d20 products while others are going to be a bit different (BESM d20). Since we plan on trying to make BESM d20 as obviously a d20 product as possible while simultaneously providing players and GMs with the complete freedom of character creation that BESM provides, it's kind of important to understand what the consumer views as d20.

Since a lot of people seem unwilling to separate D&D from d20 and vice versa, it is hard for publishers to innovate with the system through presenting new options since it will be viewed as "not d20." Currently, however, I feel that more publishers are looking to innovate the system (game designers are a creative lot, in general, so it is logical to think that they want to get creative with game mechanics eventually). Some will run the gauntlet as we did with SAS d20 and provide innovative new rules for the d20 system and deal with the hardcore audience complaining that it's "not d20" while others will follow the Green Ronin route and offer the product as OGL and thereby avoiding the entire "it's not d20" complaint since, well, it _isn't_ d20. Still, one way or another, I expect the next year or two will see more and more innovation with d20. Will it take? Who knows? All I know is that we aren't going to shy from the attempt. I also know other companies are similarly up to the challenge. I think the next year or two will be very cool for the fans. Then again, I think SAS d20 is a d20 game so what the hell do I know? <grin>

 

[AaronBurr]

RPG Industry

The following exchange was made between Mearls and Pramas.
See below for exchange, or just read my comments.

A lot has been said about how companies like Whizkids and products like d20 add money to the retailers thus make more money available for "fringe" products. A typical response has been that the "industry" is fad driven. This is very true, especially when concerned with release dates. Gaming is very much like the film industry in this regard. For the most part you either want to be an established franchise (Star Wars, Star Trek, Harry Potter, Lethal Weapon, or in gaming D&D, World of Darkness) or you want to have a marquis player (Mel Gibson, or in gaming maybe Monte Cook) or you want to be the most recent blockbuster (XXX, Armageddon, Whizkids). Blockbusters might be a creation of marquis or they might create it as the case may be, if they fit a niche in the market.

Even if you are the franchise/marquis product you still don't want to compete with a similar offering on your release date (the time you are most likely to make a profit) or the money for that genre will be split thus minimizing the profit for both. This analysis is true for the gaming industry to a certain extent. Essentially both views are correct. Hot products do add money, but almost all products can be considered to be in the same genre (I know there is more than one, but the market isn't huge to begin with) thus release dates become important as does longevity of fad. It is bad business practice to come out at the same time as a new d20 or Whizkids explosion, of course that is essentially once a month so the only answer is to try and either cover a true cult group or to find a new niche (which is exactly what Whizkids did, they boomed into existance as did Wizards with Magic).

There are a lot of great products out there that aren't going to have "line making" appeal, but would do better without Whizkids. Though this is true, it is better to have Whizkids in the industry because they will eventually pan out (or expand the market with new buyers) who should look to other games in the long run. Of course those games will have to be releasing at the right time. An example of this in the film industry would be when you see a film (good) of a particular genre not making it because of the market and a similar film or even a rip-off making it two years later.



Originally posted by mearls
In essence, Shane's analysis makes no fundamental sense. More money in the hands of retailers from Whizkids and d20 means more buying power, means a readier market for other products.

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



That makes perfect sense and it should be true, but it isn't. It's one of the many peculiar things about the game industry. When Whizkids puts out something like Heroclix, it sucks up a huge amount of the buying dollars distributors and retailers have for that month. That's no big surprise, but this is where it gets interesting. You might think, "Well, OK, I won't see big sales this month, but next month when everyone is flush with all that Whizkids money, they'll come back and order my stuff." Except that they won't. The game industry is so frontlist driven that your product from the previous month is old news and distributors and retailers are on to next thing. Furthermore, even though the channel should be swimming in dough after a hit release, it is not a rising tide that lifts all boats. For whatever reason, that extra money is not reinvested in a variety of other products. It goes to buying more Whizkids stuff, or the latest fad product like Yu-Gi-Oh, or to pay off old debt, or any of a million other places. So even in cash rich months, most publishers don't see any corresponding rise in their orders.

 

[Thorin Stoutfoot]

Ok, I recognize that a _LOT_ of people feel that feats are a core part of d20. I disagree. They are a cool extension of the system, but they are not vital to the system. The game does not

But you lose inter-game compatibility! And you have to explain to all your players that there aren't feats in this game. Can you hear the groans already?

As for skills, we have them. Fine, the list is different, but how hard is it to say "we're using the D&D list of skills plus the SAS d20 combat skill." Also, the mechanics for the skills are identical to traditional d20 with a couple of additions (specializations and combat skills).

Again, you're leaning towards SAS instead of the d20 defaults. Why add unnecessary barriers towards market acceptance? If SAS d20 was the only d20 supers game in town, then sure, do whatever you want with the skills list. But since it isn't, anything that reeks of gratituous incompatibility or that sends the vibes that you care less about the d20 market than your SAS "true blue" loyal fans is dissing the average GM (it's always the GM who picks up the book first) who thinks, "Man, these guys don't get d20, I'll look at the other d20 products first, or wait for a better implementation."

And as a note, I'm seriously curious about your answers to this. I've heard that SAS d20 is not a d20 game often enough but I simply fail to see how it isn't. It isn't packaged like D&D in Tights, but it is a d20 game. The mechanics are the same. Character creation is different.

I don't have SAS d20, so if you'll be so kind as to send me a copy, I'll post here with an analysis of why CoC d20 is considered a d20 game, but SAS d20 isn't. My suspicion is that CoC managed to get away with the minimal changes to the system needed to provide the atmosphere and attitude for CoC gaming, while SAS d20 has gratituous changes like you described, which don't add anything for the d20 player, but are a nod to the SAS loyalist (who wouldn't buy a d20 game anyway).

In other words, consumers don't care if by making those changes you've made, you make it easier to dual-stat books. We don't care about making your life easier, or saving you printing costs. But if you gratituously deviate from the standard for no reason at all (and changing skill names is definitely in the category of "gratituous"), then you might as well give up on the d20 logo and base the entire game on the OGL, AND you should be prepared to get pissed off buyers of your product.

 

[thomden]

Honestly, d20 Deadlands wasn't "good enough"

Both DL D20 and Weird Wars did quite well, selling what *most* D20 publishers sold of their stuff, which is right in line with what we sold of our standard DL classic, Hell on Earth, and Brave New World lines before. While that sounds fine, I had hoped that D20 versions of our games would sell closer to the numbers done by a few breakout products, like Atlas' Penumbra series or Green Ronin's Freeport books. Sincerely,

Shane Hensley
Pinnacle Entertainment Group

First let me say I love Deadlands. But I'd rather play D&D3e because I can get players to actually play. I was initially very excited about d20 Deadlands, and couldn't wait for it to come out.

Frankly, I was a little dissapointed by the quality of it.

The original DL core books were gorgeous, especially with the Brom cover. I was expecting a product of that quality.

If you truly wanted a "breakout" product, PEG would need to put a product out that had the love and attention paid to it the core DL hardcover books have. Look at d20 Cthulhu for example (though the diagonal formatting drives me nuts- I fail my sanity check everytime...), it is a very high quality product and has become a "breakout" product.

I really want to buy a copy of d20 DL, but it's gotta have the love!

 

[Oberton]

...
This will seem incredibly bizarre to people on these boards. The vast majority of gamers do not use the internet to look for reviews, gaming supplements, etc. This doesn't mean they don't have computers, it just means they don't use them for their gaming...

Patrick Lawinger

Easy there now, I think you might have gone just a bit to far with that comment.

There is a trend developing with computers and gamers. I see it everyday as gamers bring their MS EXCEL, e-tools, rpg master and etc. generated character sheets to the gaming table. They have a different version of the RANGER class from a very popular web-site. They want to buy a book they read about on enworld and etc. I am seeing tons of yahoo communities that players post on during the week to discuss meta game details while at work. I could go on and on about the computer and gaming... The simple fact that PDF products are showing up at gaming tables and the DM's are using the OGL files during a game to do quick searches for rules, seems to indicate that computers are becoming important. My players went nuts for the AURAN products and their 3-D Images and animiation. They sound effects and mini movies.

Later and Game-ON...

Oberton

 

[whisper_jeff]

I don't have SAS d20, so if you'll be so kind as to send me a copy, I'll post here with an analysis of why CoC d20 is considered a d20 game, but SAS d20 isn't.

... You're kidding me. You're arguing that SAS d20 isn't a d20 game and you don't even own it (which presumably means you haven't even read it...). I'm willing to discuss the SAS d20 or not d20 issue when a person has read the book and given it a fair chance but if you haven't even read the book...

 

[Oberton]

Actually, I was thinking we need more higher level modules. But I do like the idea of ones that can be run as a series. Another interesting thing would be not just low level modules, but modules that are written to be the players very first adventure. It would be great to study the reasons as to why character begin their life as adventures. I also imagine thaat after seeing the dangers many would be adventurers would find something safer. So, you'd need some tangible reward besides treasure to keep the players going.

I would really like to see a product that has all kinds of random charts for generating character details. There was a company who once made such a product and I am sure all of the "old schoolers" will remember it, but for the life of me I can not.. (If I do I will edit this post). How about the charts in the first edition of the DMG. You know the ones in the very back. Random charts for room contents, herbs, poison, sounds, smells and etc.. God what a great set of charts.. I use to look over them just to get ideas for dressing up a dungeon. I also learned a ton of new terms (I was 15 years old then) and ways to describe the environment. With todays PDF options (which can be scripted--programmed) you could really make some cool charts that could generate a rooms contents, weather, and etc.. But I would really like to see a published product with a CD included or a Web-Site to support the product...

Later and Game-ON
Oberton

 

[Thorin Stoutfoot]

... You're kidding me. You're arguing that SAS d20 isn't a d20 game and you don't even own it (which presumably means you haven't even read it...). I'm willing to discuss the SAS d20 or not d20 issue when a person has read the book and given it a fair chance but if you haven't even read the book...

Read my post again: I've analyzed what you yourself reported --- that people complain about the missing feats and the skill list. The issues there should be pretty obvious to anyone who didn't consider the SAS game primary and the d20 game secondary.

 

[Ssendam]

As if sitting down at one's computer will ever seriously challenge sitting down at a table with actual people? Good gods! If it ever reaches a point where gamers start preferring interaction via a computer over face-to-face, we'll prove we're geeks far and above what the stereotypes say.

Why can't playing online people challenge sitting round a table with people?

Ok, so it's not what I prefer, but the topic was about crossover between the two. All I'm saying is that the gap between computers and P&P has closed significantly with NWN, and there will be others to follow judging on the success of NWN. As the gap closes you will find that people will try the computer games and some will prefer them.

A game like NWN does have advantages over P&P, like; - the fact that a large amount of bookkeeping is taken care of, - being able to play with a group when you have none or not enough players in your area, - the scope to play in a group that has players in it from all over the world.

For me personally there is still a large downside but at least I can recognise the advances made over time and I'm looking into the future a little, (my personal view, sure, but thinking is good for my brain).

Also, this isn't the 80's computers are hardly considered "geeky" anymore. That's another trend that will continue, computers being commonplace, they are already putting them in our fridges and getting them to go online to order our groceries! (well, at least I still do that the "old fashioned way").