Really, this is how things should work.

If SJWs want to change the RPG market, then they should put out SJW friendly RPGs, not attack other people for putting out books that don't happen to be "progressive" enough.

Good timing: the current socio-political climate in the rpg forum and blog scene will eat this up (based on how much people are talking about its politics more than anything else).

I'm unfamiliar with blue rose, but whatever tidbits that I've picked up seem interesting and original. I might check this out for drawing world-building inspiration from it.

Marketing it next to the fantasy romance section of a bookstore is not a bad idea... But who goes to bookstores anymore? Almost all got shut down by the B&N and Borders phenomenon of free wi-fi at the coffeehouse with a side of intelligentsia cred.

That said, I am so curious how a party of Mercedes Lackey princesses in waiting will dungeon delve. I like her writing. I like costume descriptions and lengthy internal dialogue. And I like a good fantasy fucking Vietnam. Hmmm.

I hope the kickstarter has material on the game itself, for quite some time I've been trying to figure out just what is supposed to be so interesting about this system and all I've found is politics surrounding it.

The gist I'm picking up from this thread is that it's very egalitarian and relative which is more than I can say I picked up from the post. Can't say I dislike that, but I'm much more interested in the mechanics, anyone have anything nice to say about the dragon age system they're basing it on?

Quote from: jhkim;821666While there are a lot of small differences, but I'd say the key differences are talking animals and the lack of evil races - along with the psychic flavoring of magic.

I'm not sure about the psychic flavoring, but as Beagle said, Tolkien used talking animals. So then, is the key difference that there are no evil non-humans?

I don't see wolves as evil, far from it actually, but it doesn't seem like wolves would be loved by either rabbits or sheep. How do talking herbivores get along with talking predators in the Blue Rose setting?

Quote from: Bradford C. Walker;821669And then there are those who did buy, but did not play; they bought it as a status-signaller for fellow-travellers. You don't publish for those wankers any more than you do for the screeching howler monkeys who demand all, but do nothing but screech something else when they get it. (e.g. Cook and that whinefest over The Strange) You publish TRPGs for the motherfuckers who play, the ones who are there to play a fucking game and not piss around whining over First World Bullshit and where they stand in the stack.

If you are publishing based on a desire to run a business you publish for the people who will buy the game regardless of their motivation for buying. Whether they play or not is irrelevant as long as they buy. Motherfuckers who play, but who aren't interested in buying are as useless to a business as .

I liked Blue Rose.  Best of luck to GR with the new iteration:)

Quote from: Bren;821644Chris Pramas' notion that a special set of rules is needed so that people can play in a setting like that of a Tamora Pierce, Mercedes Lackey, and Jacqueline Carey story seems a little odd to me since doing that seems like something any competent and interested GM could do with their favorite existing RPG and a knowledge of any one of those author's series or novels.

The magic styles are different enough from typical spells that a dedicated system could be useful.

Quote from: jhkim;821658Cool. I definitely liked the Blue Rose setting. Lots of options and at least a mild break from the constant Tolkien-isms of many other settings. .

It could do with an increase in the number of kingdoms so there are more than one good, one evil, and one neutral option. It would be pretty easy to do as well, as there are a lot of valleys in the map that could be split off to create other countries. As it is, it's a bit too simple a political situation for my taste. I'd say between 10 and 15 polities with 3-4 evil (but different kinds of evil) and the remainder split fairly evenly between explicitly good (but in different ways) and more or less neutral (again in different ways) would be the way I would go.

Quote from: Necrozius;821691Good timing: the current socio-political climate in the rpg forum and blog scene will eat this up (based on how much people are talking about its politics more than anything else).

Until they inevitably use the wrong word, or have the wrong image, or leave something out, or leave something in, and get called out as horrible X-ists. If an explicit goal is inclusivity, then given the fractionalization of the SJ movements this is a certainty.

Quote from: Piestrio;821651If you want an actual licensed "Romantic Fantasy" RPG check out the Deryni Adventure Game based on FUDGE.

http://www.fudgerpg.com/products/deryni-adventure/ggg6001.html

The Deryni series is Romantic Fantasy? That not how it comes across to me. If anything it more like Martin's Game of Thrones only way less bloody and fewer characters dropping like flies. Although the series does have it bloody moments.

I guess if Romantic Fantasy is about character driven stories then the Deryni series qualifies.

Quote from: Bren;821659I'd have loved a sourcebook for Deryni stuff way back in the day. It's been a long, long time since I read anything by Katherine Kurtz, but my recollection is that the Deryni setting, though romantic, wouldn't align well with the stated political aims of Chris Pramas.

I recently purchased the Deryni Adventure Game and the paperback version of the Codex Derynianus. Enjoyed them both. The only problem with trying to game in the Eleven Kingdoms in that the magic system is highly plot driven so it hard to figure out its limits. On one hand it is magical psionics on the other hand a highly elaborate magical ritual system.

I'm no expert on the state of the RPG industry, but it seems they are positioning themselves fairly well in the current market. I have no driving interest in the setting and I dislike the AGE system, but I can see how it would appeal to their target audience. I could really do without the politics, but they bother me less than the dragonborne do.

Knew this thread would be here.

I'm a long time fan of Green Ronin. Less so of Blue Rose. I was intrigued by the True 20 system (but ended up not liking its generic implementation), but the setting put me off. It seemed to be too blatantly a caricature of the modern political scene.

Cashing in on the current political climate. Okay with me. Unless they actually think they're doing something, which makes me simultaneously laugh and cringe...

True20 is actually a pretty good system, though. Too bad they're scrapping that.

Quote from: Bradford C. Walker;821654A second shot for a shit property. Some folks don't read the market very well; the same folks who didn't buy before won't buy now, and the same folks who didn't play then won't now.

Forty years, folks. We've had TRPGs for forty fucking years now. We now what works, and what doesn't. This shit doesn't work, and it's long past time to start viciously punishing fools who keep trying to pull a Canute.

Are you actually suggesting that taste and demand in RPGs has remained static since 1974, that timing plays no roll in a games success or failure? Would Vampire: the Masquerade have had the same runaway success if it had come out in 1977? Would Twilight:2000 produced a long line of supplements and a second edition if it had come out in 2005? Would Rifts do just as well if it came out today?

And seriously, "time to start viciously punishing fools"? That's just an embarrassing level emotion to have worked up over Green Ronin's release schedule.

I'd say Blue Rose has a better chance of success today than its last release. There are more people in the market looking for something like that. The last edition also had the misfortune of being a D20 game at the point when people were divided mainly into two camps. There were those that were devoted enough to 3.5 that they would stick with it by way of Pathfinder. Then there were the people that never wanted to look at a D20 product again. The True 20 system wasn't bad, but people weren't looking for a better D20 game anymore. They were either fully onboard with the official version or they just wanted to get away from it entirely.

Quote from: Brad;821728True20 is actually a pretty good system, though. Too bad they're scrapping that.

I agree. Not a fan of AGE, but then again, Blue Rose is not for me anyway.

Quote from: apparition13;821714The magic styles are different enough from typical spells that a dedicated system could be useful.

Interesting. I've seen more than a few Blue Rose threads here and elsewhere, but I don't think I've ever seen anyone talk about the uniqueness of the magic system in comparison to the many predecessor systems like as D&D, Runequest/BRP, GURPS, Hero Games, WHFRP, or White Wolf.