What is THE NEXT BIG THING?

[Gundark]

Hmmm. Maybe a PVP kind of thing in RPGs. A product that will allow you to play your character in a RPG, and also in PVP settings. Granted this already has been done in MMORGs.

Maybe you could take a "spoil of war" off the loser (take their sword or something).

Just blathering

 

[Frostmarrow]

How about dividing the D&D-staff into two groups. One group of dudes who develop the miniatures game; including stats, plastic and combat rules. Let's call them Conflict Team. And then one group who focus on role-playing and interaction (with no meddling in combat systems whatsoever). That would be all king-making and intrigue, art and personality. They're Cooperation Team. True D&D is the sum of both parts but indeed both Conflict and Cooperation stand on its own.

 

[Frostmarrow]

Care to share the name of the game or a link to a website?

It is possible Lalato refers to Dungeoneer in some form.

 

[hong]

I personally found them clunky, but not as clunky as getting four 35 year old men in the same room at the same time.

I fail to see the problem. After all, there are four 5' squares in a 10x10 room.


What?


Ah.

 

[DragonLancer]

But doesn't that assume they're all the same? Don't RPGs have one huge difference between them and other game types?

Obviously, but why would you (thats a general you) want a games system that wasn't balanced? Enjoyment and fun of the game over balancing issues may work for you, but it I think it would be a poor move for the game in general.

The core rules should be balanced. Its up to an individual group/DM to change that for their game, it shouldn't be part and parcel of D&D as standard.

 

[mythusmage]

Obviously, but why would you (thats a general you) want a games system that wasn't balanced? Enjoyment and fun of the game over balancing issues may work for you, but it I think it would be a poor move for the game in general.

The core rules should be balanced. Its up to an individual group/DM to change that for their game, it shouldn't be part and parcel of D&D as standard.

You are missing so much, me lad. I'll give you a clue, I'm referring to, scope. What about the field of play? What is the difference between RPGs and other types of games where the field of play is concerned? What is the huge, nigh boundless, difference where the field of play is concerned?

 

[DragonLancer]

You are missing so much, me lad. I'll give you a clue, I'm referring to, scope. What about the field of play? What is the difference between RPGs and other types of games where the field of play is concerned? What is the huge, nigh boundless, difference where the field of play is concerned?

Thats why I said 'obviously.' You can do what you want with an RPG, products of the imagination and all that. Still needs a balanced set of rules though to work from.

 

[Joker]

Alternity 2.0.

Dreams can come true.

Sigh.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

All games? You have board games, card games, and roleplaying games. Which if these is not like the others? What is the big difference between roleplaying games on one hand, and board and card games on the other?

Board and card games sell more by at least one order of magnitude?

 

[DJCupboard]

In regards to the idea that D&D (and RPGs, in general) need to go more mainstream to succeed, I don't know if that is 1) possible given the nature of these games and 2) really the kind of thing that would help the actual game.

1) The only real way I can see to make these kinds of games more mainstream (i.e less inherently uncool seaming) would be to remove the tabletop for something more larpish (a field perhaps), then take the 4-6 (or whatever) ammount of group players and break them up into two groups, maybe increasing the numbers in both groups (maybe 6 per side for example), then taking the swords and spells etc. and replacing them with some kind of ball, and finally reducing the GMs responsibilities to something more referee-like.

2) Mainstream crossover doesn't really help the thing crossing over, does it? (I'm not postulating a fact, but asking a question.) For instance, did the Spiderman movie apreciably help comic book sales, or just movie attendance? Sure it would be neat to here 'normal' people discussing common rpg tropes in the FoodCourt, but if none of those people are actually playing the game, did the hobby survive, or did the tropes just jump ship?

For the hobby to survive and the "Next Big Thing" to succeed, it doesn't need to garner a new audience, it needs to stimulate the the immagination of the existing audience (and perhaps pull back old players) in a sweeping way. The game doesn't draw new people, the gamers draw new people.

DJC