Quote from: Aos;495131In this case I'm forced to agree with him. Having a laugh at the expense of people who paid you money in good faith is a dick move.

Why? There are a few references a spell that isn't actually detailed? And the name of the spell is called "Lost Dweomer". Small joke. Obvious. No big deal. It's worth a smile if you like it, or a frown if you don't. Oh, it shows up on a table mid-play? Big deal. Choose or roll something else, or make something up. Making a huff about it on teh interwebs? Laughable.

Quote from: two_fishes;495133Why? There are a few references a spell that isn't actually detailed? And the name of the spell is called "Lost Dweomer". Small joke. Obvious. No big deal. It's worth a smile if you like it, or a frown if you don't. Oh, it shows up on a table mid-play? Big deal. Choose or roll something else, or make something up. Making a huff about it on teh interwebs? Laughable.

I don't know, maybe, but if it comes up as a result of a random roll and then you spend 15 minutes looking through the rule book for it, and then have to go on line to actually find out it's a joke, that to me seems like a problem. It's certainly no more ridiculous than any of 100 other things that people make a huff about around here- and unlike, say, an endless masturbatory argument on the definition of RPGs or the use of 'plot' in games, it actually can have impact on one's game- which actually makes it 100% less goofy than most of what gets discussed here.

Fair point.

Quote from: Aos;495138It's certainly no more ridiculous than any of 100 other things that people make a huff about around here- and unlike, say and endless masturbatory argument on the definition of RPGs or the use of 'plot' in games, it actually can have impact on one's game-

Fair point.

LOL!!! I have no idea what the hell any of you are talking about.

Quote from: Blazing Donkey;495146LOL!!! I have no idea what the hell any of you are talking about.

LotFP: Lamentations of the Flame Princess, a game.

Is this some kind of postmodern swine thing?

Regards,
David R

I'm torn. I get the criticism about having a joke on your customers. In a product that's otherwise all together, it's a nuissance.

At the same time (I know I'm in the minority with this) I enjoy the building-from-error aspect of the hobby. It's like the "% liar" monster entries in Arduin. I think we all benefit from some of that now and then. I have done some very nice rewrites and expansions of poorly-designed and written products. I'm happy with those. Also-I might be tempted to include easter egg-type jokes or features if I ever produce a coherent product.

But in a field where there is some desire to distinguish between hobby-level and professional-level production, where people are charging money and trying to impress, and where the customer's expectation is no longer being required to fill in blanks in the rules, I guess building-from-error is as old-fashioned as mimeographed fanzines.

Quote from: stu2000;495189I'm torn. I get the criticism about having a joke on your customers. In a product that's otherwise all together, it's a nuissance.

At the same time (I know I'm in the minority with this) I enjoy the building-from-error aspect of the hobby. It's like the "% liar" monster entries in Arduin. I think we all benefit from some of that now and then. I have done some very nice rewrites and expansions of poorly-designed and written products. I'm happy with those. Also-I might be tempted to include easter egg-type jokes or features if I ever produce a coherent product.

But in a field where there is some desire to distinguish between hobby-level and professional-level production, where people are charging money and trying to impress, and where the customer's expectation is no longer being required to fill in blanks in the rules, I guess building-from-error is as old-fashioned as mimeographed fanzines.

I'm cool with building from error as well. It can be fun. Having a laugh at your paying customers is something else entirely.

Quote from: stu2000;495189At the same time (I know I'm in the minority with this) I enjoy the building-from-error aspect of the hobby. It's like the "% liar" monster entries in Arduin. I think we all benefit from some of that now and then. I have done some very nice rewrites and expansions of poorly-designed and written products. I'm happy with those. Also-I might be tempted to include easter egg-type jokes or features if I ever produce a coherent product.

But in a field where there is some desire to distinguish between hobby-level and professional-level production, where people are charging money and trying to impress, and where the customer's expectation is no longer being required to fill in blanks in the rules, I guess building-from-error is as old-fashioned as mimeographed fanzines.

I find building-from-error a loathsome idea and yet another sign that consumers in this market are happy to put up with inferior products for some bizarre reason.  If I'm paying money, I don't want poorly written crap.  I could do that myself.

But at least that's just a side effect of amateur quality.  Intentionally creating a rulebook that contains references to rules that don't exist in an otherwise serious rulebook with nothing suggesting it is a joke?  That's just hubris.

What makes it worse in this case is that the joke isn't remotely funny.

I think it's funny... and it feels like something I might see in the old Arduin books... it's a puzzle-laugh the first time you encounter it, then you're in on the joke and wait for newbies to stumble on it, 'Hey, lookit Tim! He's gone and lost his Lost Dweamor!'
Otherwise it's an invite to make something up... and a jibe at those expecting a 'rule for everything'.

Whether Lost Dweomer, taken isolatedly, is funny or not, Pundy is making a big deal of something which strikes me as fairly inconsequential (since it's obvious, to me anyway, that whatever "damage" this "joke" can cause to your game session is ridiculously easy to prevent or fix, for any minimally competent GM). This, of course, is amusing in and of itself. So, teleologically speaking, Lost Dweomer is funny, insofar as it has generated yet another laughable instance of Señor Pundejo getting all riled up apropos of nothing.

Raggi, again, I'd have had no problem with the joke had it been in the spell list.  The second it starts appearing on other tables, that makes those tables less useful, and seems a very stupid thing to do, and adds nothing to the humour.

Judging by how it does seem like you have a certain disdain for high-level spells (and play) in general, I think its likely that you're actually telling the truth about the whole thing having been intentional from the start.  The inclusion of the joke in the mechanics themselves means you're a bit of dick, but not nearly as much of a dick as you would be if you were now trying to cover up for a mistake by claiming it to have been a joke.

Of course, its also yet another symptom of your weakest quality as an RPG designer, the way you let your own personal prejudices harm the value of your game; as sure as how some RPG writers let their personal politics, religion or ideologies fuck up their settings by turning them into propagandism, your personal ideas about what you don't like about D&D play (as opposed to how you can make D&D better, which is a totally different way to handle things and actually productive) is something that at several points hamstrings LotFP.  Which, don't get me wrong, is still an incredible iteration of D&D, but it would have been more incredible and not less if you hadn't pulled shit like "You know what? I don't like orcs so I won't actually have any kind of meaningful monster list or monster generation system whatsoever" or "fuck high level spells, I'll just gimp high level play entirely".

That shit is counterproductive.

RPGPundit

Quote from: The Butcher;495256Pundy is making a big deal of something which strikes me as fairly inconsequential

Though this has his MO since the beginning, his next post contains some valid criticisms. I think that he's a better reviewer than many people would credit him for, despite he getting hanged up in some petty shit from time to time.

Quote from: RPGPundit;495302That shit is counterproductive.

The strength of the Open Game License is that if the issue is important enough other commercial publishers can step in an fix it by releasing another project. However I don't think the Lost Dweomer issue causing that. As for the monster issue  I can see somebody releasing a monster manual for the game even if Raggi doesn't.

A similar strong reaction to yours caused the creation of OSRIC when Castles and Crusades didn't turn out to be the return of AD&D 1st.