Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Beginning of the End" data-source="post: 5069925" data-attributes="member: 55271">Don't do it.Re: System free.(1) They've been tried before. They have never, ever been successful in the entire history of the industry.(2) People generally use published scenarios because they either can't or don't want to do the prep themselves. System-free scenarios still require you to do the mechanical prep (which is the part of prep most people like the least).(3) Anyone who uses scenarios despite needing to do mechanical adaptation is usually flexible-minded enough to realize that they can just ignore the stat blocks belonging to some other system and treat the adventure as if it were system-free.(4) System free is largely an illusion. The only place it even vaguely applies is "generic fantasy", but "generic fantasy" is a label that still covers a multitude of sins. Any given "generic fantasy" game will have subtly different expectations about the power relationship between PCs, orcs, ogres, giants, and dragons (for example).Re: Multi-system.(1) It's illusionary for the same reasons system-free is an illusion.(2) It's hard enough putting together a functional and useful format for a single system. (Most companies fail miserably.) Trying to include the information for two systems while still having the product be functional and useful is even more difficult if not impossible.(3) For the consumer, there is virtually no added utility from the multi-system approach. Multi-system is theoretically useful for the publisher (who can theoretically market it to customers using both systems), but for the customer it's a negative value. The only way it provides utility for the customer is if they're planning to run the adventure twice -- once for each system being supported.So while it looks, at first glance, as if you should be increasing your customer base, you are actually shrinking it. A lot.You are always going to be better off either (a) picking a horse and riding it or (b) publishing two different versions of the material (one for each system). The latter is expensive, obviously, although in a digital age it might be more applicable. (Although the extra development costs can't be ignored.)If you do that, you can rest assured that virtually everyone flexible-minded enough to buy system-free material is still going to be willing to give your material a shot.For setting material, the standards may be a little different (although there has never been a successful system-free setting). DMP has gone system-minimal on its City Supplements (see sig), but city supplements aren't exactly know for having lots of mechanical material in the first place.</blockquote>

Verification