|
Post by AxeMental on Jan 19, 2005 15:22:22 GMT -5
C&C had a chance to make something really cool and botched it. THe question is, if they had done it the way we would have done it (rules and artwork and lively in spirit) would it have been a big hit, or would it have had worse sales and popularity? The assumption was that it had to appeal to the 3tards and 2E tards, that was IMO a bad assumption.
Personally I think there still is a need for a new AD&D system (something non-powergaming or PC or idiotic etc.)...something different from what 3E is...but was wondering what you thought.
|
|
|
Post by jrmapes on Jan 19, 2005 16:50:06 GMT -5
I dont know if C&C will become the big hit or be a complete miss. It really is in all honesty too soon to tell. But the early prognosis doesn't look that good IMO.
As for the need of a new AD&D type game? That is a tuff question. As we have seen with C&C, a few people that are old D&D/AD&D fans would most likely accept it. But I still think most would not. Old D&D/AD&D fans are FANS for a reason, and no matter how hard publishers are trying to do so, trying to imitate the old school feel just isnt grabbing the fans of old D&D/AD&D (at least not beyond the first couple initial purchases).
Unless a new release is just really OUTSTANDING it would just splinter off a few more people away from the original games. I dont think there EVER could be a "new" game that would stay true to Old School gaming on all fronts. Everything has changed too much (the writers, the game players, and the market). Instant gratification has seized control of the gaming community (as well as almost every other aspect of life). This IS THE BANE of Pencil and Paper games.
The ONLY thing that I see as a viable option is for a company with the resources, drive, and marketing capability to Re-Issue AD&D 1e with the best old school aspects of 2e added in but still be able to keep it in a THREE book format. This means it all would have to be cleaned up, re-formatted, re-edited, indexed better, and layed out better so that you dont have to hunt for one sentence in an obscure/barely-related location for the definition on a rule. It would have to come from a current highly visible company as well. Otherwise it will end up like a majority of current non-wotc games and wotc game add-ons...
It simply wont be stocked.
Like most all here and on other sites, I LOVE my old books and the game. But the books really do need updating. You cant depend on rule clarification / definitions coming from a half dozen modules and a bunch of magazine articles. What terrifies me is that just the DMG alone, if re-editied and re-formated to make it more user friendly and re-published at HALF the quality of binding would most likely retail in the $50 range like AEG's Stargate SG-1 Core rules. This would squash the whole effort right out of the gates.
I would be interested in seeing a "new" AD&D or AD&D-like system but I still have to echo the sentiments of many of the old schoolers when C&C was announced...
Why would i switch if i already have the Original and it isnt broke? What would make me want to switch over?
So, a cleaned up reissue... IMO, more than likely. A "new" game... probably not.
But... I am just one old timer. YMMV.
Jerry
|
|
|
Post by foster1941 on Jan 19, 2005 17:58:29 GMT -5
Good question, and I suspect that the answer is actually NO. Old-school relic gamers (i.e. us) are pretty much by definition satisfied with what we already have and therefore aren't particularly in the market for a new game, former old-school gamers (i.e. people who used to play OD&D and 1E AD&D but no longer do) presumably weren't satisfied by at least something about those games, otherwise they'd still be playing them (assuming they're still playing rpgs at all, which I realize most of them probably aren't), and those who have no real first-hand knowledge of the old school -- whose knowledge of OD&D and 1E comes from 2E, Mentzer, Hackmaster, C&C, and the scurrilous misrepresentations bandied about on EN World -- I don't think would even know how to react to an actual old-school game, because the paradigm and their expectations are so much different. Can you imagine the reaction when you told some 3E fan who likes buying new supplements and adventures every single week that this one rulebook (or one set of 3 rulebooks as the case may be) was not only all they'd ever need but all they were ever going to get whether they wanted more or not? They'd complain endlessly that the game "wasn't being supported" even though the truth is that the game doesn't need "official support" and the publishers just aren't lying to you and saying that it does (or cynically designing the game in such a manner that it actually does -- leaving out crucial bits (monsters, multi-classing rules, etc.)).
I agree with Jerry that I'd like to see a 'spruced up' re-release of the 3 core 1E hardbacks -- redesigned and re-edited for better clarity but without trying to 'fix' or 'modernize' the actual rules -- but we're never going to get it (barring a miraculous ownership change -- some millionaire buying the D&D property and giving it back to EGG or some such). The best we can realistically hope for is a facsimile reprint edition of the original books, and even that seems unlikely (considering how WOTC let the obvious idea of a 30th anniversary reprint of the OD&D box pass by last year and instead gave us that embarrassing piece of nuts coffee-table book, and how cheaply old 1E books are still going on ebay).
|
|
|
Post by AxeMental on Jan 19, 2005 20:06:39 GMT -5
Foster: "Good question, and I suspect that the answer is actually NO. Old-school relic gamers (i.e. us) are pretty much by definition satisfied with what we already have"
Well, I'm talking about something that captures new players to RPGs (BRAND SPANKIN NEW). There are alot of kids not happy with 3E, video games, etc. (hence the popularity of HPotter, and LOTR revival). Marketing would not init. be to the old hard core 70s and 80s geeks like us. The old time geeks would find it and play it, but to make it a marketable product it would have to appeal to millions of kids. I wouldn't nec. build popularity at the geekto hard core 3tard gaming conventions either; rather I'd attempt another avenue perhaps as a single book and not as complex as AD&D or CoC yet with the heart and soul of Gygaxian style design and play.
JP Mapes: "Everything has changed too much (the writers, the game players, and the market). Instant gratification has seized control of the gaming community (as well as almost every other aspect of life). This IS THE BANE of Pencil and Paper games"
See, I disagree with this basic premise, not only because I think it's been proven wrong (with the extreme popularity of HPotter and now LOTR again) but also because I refuse to believe people and cultures change to the point that crap becomes preferable to quality. The more things change the more they stay the same. Classic is classic, and fad is fad. What changed were two things, marketers who found following fad was more profitable, and the media that steer public opinion (this is good that is bad). However, the public rarely falls for such tricks for long (look at the last election, every press agency was strongly ant-Bush, yet people ignored the press).
Anyhow, I have to believe AD&D would be preferable to many kids over say 3E (if given a fair shake), regardless of what generation were in. My kid hates teh same crap I hate on her own (same with her friends).
|
|
|
Post by foster1941 on Jan 19, 2005 20:45:51 GMT -5
That's an interesting thought -- could an 'old-school-style' game marketed not to the existing geek/hardcore gamers but rather to the mass of kids/teeagers who've read/seen/enjoyed Harry Potter and LOTR and who aren't being served by the current heavily-geekish offerings from WOTC find an audience? I dunno, but I still kinda doubt it. You can say that it's all just marketing and media hype and that kids really are still the same as we were -- with good taste and judgment -- and that they're not all zombified and addicted to the style over substance hyperkinetic over-caffeinated videogames and cartoons and music and so forth that we see on TV, and while that's undoubtedly true of some of them (just like it's true that if you look hard enough you can find kids who'd rather listen to The Beatles or Ray Charles than Linkin Park or Jay-Z) I think it's a pretty small percentage and that most kids really are satisfied with the junk-media short attention span culture.
But Harry Potter and LOTR were successful. Couldn't that carry over to a well-done rpg? Maybe, but pen & paper D&D requires a LOT of pre-game prepwork -- to learn the rules, to design a dungeon, to gather everybody together at the same time & place -- that I don't think a lot of kids would be willing to put up with today because they have more choices and outlets than we did in the 70s and 80s -- more cable channels, better video games, the internet, etc. -- even if they aren't addicted to the instant-gratification short attention span culture. To have any chance of success I think you'd need to be able to start playing it right out of the box, either alone or with at most one other person. Perhaps a computer game that teaches the rules and introduces the style and that which once you've finished has prepared you to 'graduate' to a more standard pen & paper game (or, more likely, an online chatroom game). An interesting idea. Certainly more potential than that POS "D&D Basic Set" with the plastic figurines that WOTC released last fall (and which as far as I can tell has only sold to the existing geek-collectors and actual kids couldn't care less about).
|
|
|
Post by AxeMental on Jan 19, 2005 21:27:12 GMT -5
Foster: "To have any chance of success I think you'd need to be able to start playing it right out of the box, either alone or with at most one other person. Perhaps a computer game that teaches "
Good point, I could see this presented as a table top simo/ with a web based thing (small scale everquest done well) or like you said a disk w/ the game. Get the book has a cd in back that can link into a web based game or solo game w/dungeon room generator and monsters.
|
|
|
Post by The Master on Jan 19, 2005 22:11:03 GMT -5
Foster: However, the public rarely falls for such tricks for long (look at the last election, every press agency was strongly ant-Bush, yet people ignored the press). ;D You just earned 25 exp points axe. I agree there is no reason an old school game won't sell to new players. If they haven't seen, it's new to them. C&C was NEVER meant to appeal to new players. That's why it turned out the way it did. The orginal versions sold better than any other version. Period. Video games sold better around that time too, so i DON'T think the "Diablo" factor is near as bad as they say. It would have to be closer to Holmes though, because even the white box assumed experinced players (albeit wargamers). The Classic box set might be the way to go.
|
|
|
Post by rebecca on Jan 20, 2005 2:03:25 GMT -5
By definition new is not old school. It is new school.
Role playing games are coming out all the time, there was a new Everquest d20 game only last year, and there's lots of way more interesting (although often quite poor) stuff on the indipendent circuit if you know where to look.
For a real class system, just go through the My Documents folder of a PC belonging to a creatively-inclined role player (indeed, most roleplayers tend to be quite creative).
As for such a system being sucessful in the mainstream, i'm sorry but it's not going to happen again. Not without shader 2.0 support, ragdoll and real physics systems and cutting edge 3D graphics. Or option B: 90 mins formulaic film with shallow plot, lots of explosions, and obligatory fallen Madonna with the big boobies.
Only a few days ago I was wandering through a toy store trying to find a present for my nephew's birthday and it struck me just how "pre-packaged" everything was. I dont meen in terms of glossy boxes, I meen the games themselves.
This is the game, this is how you play it. There was nothing creative - not even a fingure puppet! It would appear that manufacturers dont think kids make up their own games anymore. I'm sure they do - before they learn not too... I guess the whole concept of imagination just isn't profiteable enough to be encouraged.
Creativity is a major part of roleplaying in my opinion, and so I think RPG's are going to continue in a steady popularity decline and find that the term "RPG" is eventually rebranded to encompass something that we would find quite shallow in the true RPG sense... You never know, maybe in the future they'll called Everquest an RPG! LOL... I pray that doesnt happen until after i'm gone personally....
Oh dear.
|
|
|
Post by foster1941 on Jan 20, 2005 2:04:28 GMT -5
Are any of you guys familiar with the Frank Mentzer D&D Basic Set (from 1983, with the Larry Elmore cover)? It starts out with an extended 'second person' narrative that explains the basic premises of the game and then goes on to a full-fledged solo dungeon adventure in 'choose-your-own-adventure' style that more fully introduces the rules of the game, and only starts presenting the actual 'rulebook content' (character generation rules, experience tables, spell descriptions, etc.) about 30pp into the book. This was the version of the game I was first introduced through, and thanks to it I didn't need an experienced older player to show me the ropes, I was able to figure it all out on my own with just the rulebook (of course that didn't last, because the older players immediately contradicted all the good lessons the book had taught me ). Anyway, something like this (but less corny and 'kiddie,' and with more specific old-school 'Gygaxian' flavor -- perhaps something more along the lines of the old Official AD&D Coloring Album*) done as a computer game with full graphics and interactivity could serve as a great introduction to the game. Package it as a CD together with a rulebook along the lines of the Holmes Basic D&D rulebook (but organized more sensibly, perhaps more like the Moldvay edition -- there's really no good reason to put the Wandering Monster tables before the chargen rules like Holmes did!) with some classy old-school-style artwork (neither 'punk' 3E-style nuts nor gay 2E-style nuts) and put some play-aid tools on the CD as well -- character generators, hypertext PDF version of the rulebook, random dungeon generators, tools to facilitate online play -- and I think you'd have something that could appeal to kids/teenagers today -- perhaps not in the fad numbers of the early 80s, but moreso than the current edition with its cheap plastic toys and 'geek chic' appeal is doing.
|
|
|
Post by foster1941 on Jan 20, 2005 2:06:18 GMT -5
(Continued from my previous post, more re: the Official AD&D Coloring Album)*have any of you guys ever seen this thing? It's from 1979, with very old-school-style art and a story by EGG himself and it oozes old-school D&D flavor. My best gaming friend actually had a copy of this back in the 80s, but of course we colored it all in . I wish I still had a copy today (but not enough to pay what an uncolored copy typically goes for on ebay). Here's a post originally made by darkseraphim in The Acaeum forums describing the contents of this little-known product in detail:
|
|
|
Post by foster1941 on Jan 20, 2005 2:28:12 GMT -5
Creativity is a major part of roleplaying in my opinion, and so I think RPG's are going to continue in a steady popularity decline and find that the term "RPG" is eventually rebranded to encompass something that we would find quite shallow in the true RPG sense... You never know, maybe in the future they'll called Everquest an RPG! LOL... I pray that doesnt happen until after i'm gone personally.... I agree that what we old-fogeys consider to be a role-playing game -- a half-dozen friends gathered around a table with dice and miniatures eating chips and drinking Mountain Dew -- is almost certainly doomed to die with us, but I think the concept of role-playing games -- essentially creative group improvisational storytelling -- is too fundamental to human nature (especially in childhood/adolesence) to ever really die out. What I think we'll eventually get is something with graphics and interactivity like Everquest, but which allows more creative participation on a small-scale personal level -- allowing 'dungeon masters' to create their own plots and adventures and to interact directly (albeit online -- but younger people don't seem to make as much distinction between online interaction and in-person interaction as we do) with a chosen handful of other players (essentially the same thing as what a DM does today, but backed up with lots of graphics and without need to interpret 'the rules,' which will all be fully automated -- thus the DM becomes less 'referee' and more fully 'storyteller').
|
|
|
Post by AxeMental on Jan 20, 2005 6:56:43 GMT -5
Fpster wrote in resp. to "rebecca : "I agree that what we old-fogeys consider to be a role-playing game -- a half-dozen friends gathered around a table with dice and miniatures eating chips and drinking Mountain Dew -- is almost certainly doomed to die with us"
OK what about creating a game that appealed to kids and parents, or something that could be fun with 2-4 kids instead of the 4-8 of AD&D?
The fact is I don't give my kid the freedom to walk around the way I did, and most parents are the same. Long gone are the days of walking half a mile to see billy's new bike stepping over drunks along the way. And even going to the neighbors the way we used to (jump on our bikes and go) is rare at least in Florida. Parents are more on their gaurd then ever. THis would have to be like monopoly in appeal.
|
|
|
Post by The Master on Jan 20, 2005 9:01:00 GMT -5
I agree that what we old-fogeys consider to be a role-playing game -- a half-dozen friends gathered around a table with dice and miniatures eating chips and drinking Mountain Dew -- is almost certainly doomed to die with us, Don't be so negative. Even the lame versions of D&D could sell in b-daltons and stuff. Board games still sell. Hell the big thing in games now is texas holdem.
|
|
|
Post by The Master on Jan 20, 2005 9:22:28 GMT -5
this would be a good starter set www.acaeum.com/DDIndexes/SetPages/SetScans/Basic91Box.htmlit had a choose your own adventure to get the dm started. The first adventure had a bunch of cards that guided the dm through each encounter. after that it had a big map for the dm to create his first adventure. Unlike C&C, it didn't hold the player's hand. it was still D&D all the way. it covered the first five levels, and would lead right into the rules cyclopedia.
|
|
|
Post by PapersAndPaychecks on Jan 20, 2005 13:51:03 GMT -5
AD&D spreads by word-of-mouth. That's how it always spread in the past and it's how it would continue to spread.
I've probably introduced more people to 1e AD&D since it went out of print than I did during the time it was widely available.
I swear, if someone were to reprint the original 1e rulebooks so people could actually get a hold of them - and by "original" rulebooks I mean PHB/DMG/MM - I think a lot of people would buy them. The quality of the game and the writing is still outstanding, and its many quirks and flaws are a part of its charm.
The most interference with the original product that I would want to see would be a clarifications rulebook sold as an optional extra. By this I mean a compilation of the various clarifications and additions and examples taken from the Dragon magazine and certain early modules.
I mean, what I'd really love to see is a product that includes all my personal house rules quoted as gospel, but eliminates rubbish like the weapons -v- armour type tables, psionics for PC's, the monk and bard classes... but let's get real here, everyone has their own opinion on which rule-changes would be desirable and which would destroy the game.
|
|