BryonD
Hero
I didn't think you had. I was just asking.Turjan said:I didn't imply anything else.
I pretty much agree with your assessment.
I didn't think you had. I was just asking.Turjan said:I didn't imply anything else.
Gundark said:Anyhow, the question is...Is it a good move for a publisher to ditch d20 and develop their own system? And if so, when?
eyebeams said:That interpretation of Farscape represents a kind of post-hoc confirmation bias, IMO. It bombed, so it must be the designer!
As for SG-1, I can't see d20 helping AEG keep the license. " We want to make a game based on your IP that requires us to open other IP." I'm sure a licensing executive with an understanding of the industry no larger than a quick precis likes *that.*
To an *dedicated RPG fanbase*, system matters more.
What happened? The D20 bubble and 3.5 happened.
As it stands, though, while it's technically possible to close anything beyond existing OGC, the fact of the matter is that to be an honest participant, publishers should release coherent open content.
They also are not usually tied to Josh Whedon bandwagons either.....eyebeams said:Serenity was its 4th Printing in September or therabouts. Flashes in the pan don't usually get that.
But no one is debating the success of WoD.One of the ironies with a successful RPG is that their communities tend to form on their own, instead of integrating with communities like ENWorld and RPGNet. For instance, the WoD has multiple active boards whose members never visit generalized RPG sites (at least as posters).
Turjan said:There has an "Actual Play" thread using Dogs in the Vineyard's Firefly adaptation been started on rpg.net just today.
Well, OGC principally just considers mechanics and some D&D monsters. This doesn't touch any IP from a TV series. And there have been enough examples of OGL declarations that close nearly everything; just look at Malhavoc Press products as examples.
However, this is purely academic, as I don't think that the d20 icon helps sales in the current climate. I suspect the opposite.
BryonD said:They also are not usually tied to Josh Whedon bandwagons either.....
Again, I'm not at all trying to speak conclusively here. I'm just curious.
The theme here seems to be that it burned bright and then was done.
Is that false?
But no one is debating the success of WoD.
Can you link me to the multiple active Serenity RPG boards?
Well, here it obviously is an "actual play" thread.eyebeams said:I had to check the timestamp on that, since it reminds me of the time Luke Crane campaigned for AP report propaganda after I mentioned that most Burning Wheel/Empire APs were more like "actual plans to play eventually."
There are enough games around that are shock-full of Star Wars and Star Trek material, they just don't say so. None of them sells. Material that doesn't come with the original names of persons and objects doesn't have any commercial worth whatsoever. This has been shown time and time again.eyebeams said:If you provide d20 stats for Malcolm Reynolds, I can copy them for "Balcolm Breynolds." The game trait names are open and numbers aren't copyrightable, and the idea that specific expressions of game stats (like a creature's statblock) are protected is . . . well, something I wouldn't want to hire someone to argue in court.
mearls said:The discussion of system is mostly irrelevant, since you can't sell a game without a compelling hook behind it. The people making TRPGs today are in their mid to late 30s, and it shows. Licenses that hit their peaks 25 years ago, endless retreads of the same old same old (pulp, pirates, supers), these are all trotted out in front of a generation of gamers that simply doesn't care. In most cases, the question of d20 or not is irrelevant, since the game or license is dead out of the gate.
Pramas said:Luckily for us WotC is forging ahead with such cutting edge innovative titles as Expedition to Castle Ravenloft, Expedition to the Ruins of Greyhawk, and a third attempt at Star Wars d20...