TheRPGSite

So let's pretend Paradox pulls the license for World of Darkness from Onyx Path... for kicks and giggles tell me:

World of Darkness: Reloaded -

- Who gets the license?
- What is the system?
- How would you change it?

GO!

With a name like that, the obvious choice would have to be Pinnacle and the Savage Worlds system. World of Darkness can join all the other Reloaded games there. Deadlands Reloaded, Hell on Earth Reloaded, the upcoming Lost Colony Reloaded...

Sorry, couldn't resist. :D

Seriously, though, I don't know that I have a perfect answer for that one, so I'll have to pick and choose some different options. As far as publisher, I'd want FFG because they put out gorgeous yet quite durable hardcovers. System? I'd probably go with a heavily customized version of d6/Mini 6. Maybe even modify it for d10s so the traditional dice are used.

The big problem would be what lore to go with or change. That part I really don't know. I'm most familiar with Werewolf, and I have to say neither WtA or WtF really thrilled me on that end. I'd be tempted to try coming up with something completely new for werewolves.

I will give you two.

One that I want.

- Sine Nomine
- Stars Without Number OSR
- I think he would make a better D&D WoD than Monte Cook did.  Not mention make it how customizable it is while still being simple for everyone to understand.

Now what is most likely to happen.

- Fantasy Flight Games
- Will most likely stick with storyteller and storytelling
- At least clean up the system and get rid of the bulk in nWoD.

Quote from: Snowman0147;862341- Sine Nomine
- Stars Without Number OSR
- I think he would make a better D&D WoD than Monte Cook did.  Not mention make it how customizable it is while still being simple for everyone to understand.

This would be my first choice if it wasn't for one rather huge problem. Kevin Crawford is just one guy, and even though he does an insane amount of work there's just no way he could handle the entire World of Darkness line by himself.

I would be fully behind FFG cleaning up Storyteller/Storytelling and the NWoD, too.

I would hire Avery Alder McDaldno, Andrew Medeiros, and Kris Newton to write it. They have experience in writing monster games and simplistic mechanics that support the themes. The focus would be on creating a customizable dark urban fantasy game. All the lore from the previous editions, classic and new, will be provided in a modular format aided by the simplicity of the new system. A series of adventure paths showcasing the diversity of the world of darkness will be the primary money maker.

Quote from: Brand55;862342This would be my first choice if it wasn't for one rather huge problem. Kevin Crawford is just one guy, and even though he does an insane amount of work there's just no way he could handle the entire World of Darkness line by himself.

To be fair I did point out that Fantasy Flight Games is the most likely case to get it.  Still I like to point out that one guy did far more successful kickstarters than the 3rd edition Exalted team.

Quote from: Snowman0147;862346To be fair I did point out that Fantasy Flight Games is the most likely case to get it.  Still I like to point out that one guy did far more successful kickstarters than the 3rd edition Exalted team.

Oh, absolutely. I said you'd need A team to handle the World of Darkness, just not THAT team. :D

Quote from: tenbones;862314World of Darkness: Reloaded -

- Who gets the license?

Palladium.  Their Nightspawn/Nightbane game was much more evocative and horror-themed than anything WW ever put out.

Quote from: tenbones;862314- What is the system?

Why not go with a revision of Palladium's?

Quote from: tenbones;862314- How would you change it?

Honestly?  I'd just let it die.  Burn it to ash and sprinkle it over the ocean under a blazing sun.

Don't have a company in mind, so lets say I have it.

Systemic Changes: Love the way characters are created, in the main, dislike dice pools.  So, spitballing: Retaining D10's, roll dice pools equal to attribute for tests, keeping highest, adding skill to total of highest dice. Target Numbers would range from, say, 7 or so for easy tests to 15 for very difficult. Permutations possible include bonuses for high matches (say +1 for every die at highest, or perhaps for every extra ten), which could leave TNs unchanged, allowing perhaps a little higher at the top end (16 or 17 for 'impossible' difficulties), or reroll and add for tens, which would mean much higher possible TNs.

Combat: Remove any form of automatic dodging, which would reduce the impact of Dex as 'combat god stat'. Perhaps Dex could be a fixed modifier to hit TNs for non-surprised characters, with a rolled sex for active defenses.

Clearly, removing some of the additional crap, like humanity (perhaps replaced by something akin to the madness meters from Unknown Armies) would be called for.  For supernatural gribblies (at least), a vast increase in overall health, or perhaps out and out immunity to mundane weapons (bullets, lets say).

Reworking supernatural powers might be a bit much for a spitball forum post, but in the main I'd suggest that powers should either be self contained (no dot leveling/ability taxation), or should start at 'cool and useful' and move up from there, not start at 'why bother having powers at all' and moving on to 'sometimes cool and/or useful' at the back end.

For weapons, accuracy and damage are separated (again). This removes the nWoD weirdnesses of high powered weapons also being the most accurate.

For lore:

Step One: Establish a fixed point of the game world, say a specific date, and all books are written as 'as of this date', rather than a progressing plot/metaplot. This allows a fixed common setting with an entirely open future. Assuming sufficient success, even related novels must be set before/at that date, leaving the setting as presented by book's end.

Clans/Tribes: Inherent to supernaturals by 'birth', I'm cool with importing from either the oWoD or nWoD, preferably both, based on supposed coolness. I think the Nosferatu from the oWoD are more evocative in a  sense, but the rules of the nWoD Nos may be more elegant. My setting would allow for maximum choice here, with no single clan/group of clans holding political dominance outside of regional pockets of influence.  Clans would have very little political influence per se, with only a few cultural traits.  So, for example, the Ventrue might rule in, say, Northern Europe, but merely be one clan among many in Italy, where the Giovanni (spitballing), have near total political dominance, while in the New World no single clan can claim political power over any other clan.

For political factions, again, I'd happily expand the total by taking from both iterations, but rather than treat, say, the Camarilla as some world wide ur-organization but rather a guiding philosophy that forms its own cells in various cities/regions.  I'd also set the system up so that joining such an organization is entirely optional, rather than the alternative optional favored by WW designers.  I think I'd include some advice regarding how to form the network of oppositional and allied factions in a city for the GM to make parts of the setting their own, and reduce the inbuilt antipathy of various factions.  

I'd also look at more advanced integration of the various monster types, so that you might see, as an inbuilt assumption, a werewolf mercenary working for the vampire prince of the city, who in turn must negotiate with the Mages for access to various political resources, perhaps neighborhoods that are entirely wolf run etc.

In a more specific sense:

Vampires: more emphasis on the blood drinking and politics, less 'control over all human institutions' and less 'blood addicted ghouls'.  I'd retain ghouls and blood addiction in human thralls, but have it clearly less reliable, less absolute. Human organizations, such as the police, should still be a threat to the vampires, and more powerful organizations may be aware of the supernatural and stand opposed or attempt to use the vampires for their own ends.

Werewolves: Crinos/Warform should not be a 'once in a great while' sort of thing. I'm fine with the spiritual angle, totem animals and animistic religions guiding werewolves, though I'd probably make it more optional. I'd remove the whole 'police of the spirit world' aspect of the games, removing even the ability to travel to spirit worlds (a WTF moment for any player new to the setting for good reason). Werewolves are creatures of the flesh, and should remain so. More emphasis on their out of control animal sides. As vampires have to feed, werewolves have to hunt. Consumption of the flesh of men should be something every werewolf has to face, not some sin they easily avoid.

Mages: I actually sort of like the whole Atlantis/Towers thing from nWoD, though I don't quite recall all the details. Beyond that I'd like to see more traditional magic types. Geotic hermeticism and (god help me) wicca shamanism and so forth. I'd like to see a much cleaner set of rules for what magic can accomplish, and in that sense I'm fond of mages/wizards having to spend time actually casting spells, with lots of ritual and implements.  I'd probably steal a bit about 'hanging' incomplete spells around, probably in fetishes, to be used in emergencies.

Prometheans: Don't know a huge bit about them, despite having owned the book for years. From what I recall, I'd likely remove that whole 'taint the earth for miles forever' bit as just too god-damn over-the-top silly.  The primary focus should be on trying to achieve a sense of humanity, human connection, and how their nature interferes with that. I seem to recall a bit about prometheans appearing human, guised by an illusion or some such, in the book. That should be gone.  Obviously Prometheans from different origins should have different problems with their lack of humanity.  Golems are mostly simply lumps of clay, motivated by ancient orders they can't refuse and can barely understand, patchworks are clearly abominations that drive men to rage and fear, but are the most human, with the sorts of human desires we can all understand. They would want acceptance more than the other sorts.  Again, like the other monsters, they should be driven by their inhuman wants to one extent or another.

Hunters: I'm torn. I really liked the old Hunter, but the New Hunter is a bit more accurate to my take on the WoD as it should be.  Hunters are driven by a variety of motives, form small groups, or larger groups, with unique motivations. I'd love to toss in a bit of Nietchzie (Sp? Fuck it, don't care...), with the whole 'lest monster you become' or 'the abyss staring back at you' angle.  Hunters gain power through their hunts, but in the process become less human and more monstrous, that sort of thing.  It should be reasonably common that old, experienced hunters (NPCs to start, PCs should risk this path) tend to become the exact sort of monster they hunt the most, either through accident or through deliberate actions they chose, without necessarily losing their motivation (or even, necessarily, any supernatural hunter powers that they may have possessed).

Demon: Aside from making sure that Demons exist in the setting from the beginning, or not at all?  I'm rather more fond of the old Demon: The Fallen over Demon: The Descent.  Descent isn't bad, but its uneven and a bit too alien.  I'd rather have fallen angels possessing the bodies of the damned over inhuman machines occupying glitches in the matrix.   I'm also fine with Demons being powerful in a rather generalized sense.  What do I mean? Well, if we accept that Werewolves are the physical powerhouses, have Demons just under them at full 'beast mode' power. If Mages are the arcane powerhouses, then Demons are just under Them, and so forth.  So Demons should be almost as alienated as Prometheans, almost as versatile as Hunters, and almost as corrupting as Vampires?  Second tier, but to each 'splat' in turn.



I could bust this out for a few hours of brainstorming. Ideas about artifacts, about each monster's personal quest/challenge type (Demons vary between seeking redemption or wallowing in Sin for power, and are challenged by...oh... divinity itself as manifested through reality. Vampires need blood to live, but risk becoming beastial and savage through over indulgence. Werewolves... well... you get it, I think...)

Quote from: Christopher Brady;862350Palladium.  Their Nightspawn/Nightbane game was much more evocative and horror-themed than anything WW ever put out.

/jots notes down. Must look into.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;862350Why not go with a revision of Palladium's?

Oooo but Palladium's likelihood of getting a much deserved revision is... well... you know. HOWEVER... we do have Savage World's Rifts coming!

Quote from: Christopher Brady;862350Honestly?  I'd just let it die.  Burn it to ash and sprinkle it over the ocean under a blazing sun.

Oh you are no goddamn fun!

Quote from: tenbones;862420/jots notes down. Must look into.

If you can find it and ignore the AD&D 2e rip off system they were STILL using, I heartily recommend it.

Quote from: tenbones;862420Oooo but Palladium's likelihood of getting a much deserved revision is... well... you know. HOWEVER... we do have Savage World's Rifts coming!

Fair point.  I'll change my answer to Savage Worlds, minus Bennies.  Or only get Bennies if you willingly screw over your character for some reason.

Quote from: tenbones;862420Oh you are no goddamn fun!

The issue for me, is that the Anne Rice Politicking was never there except in certain groups, the bigger game play was Supers With Fangs (and Claws), and a lot of it is grounded in 90's angst that hasn't aged well.

If I were to reboot it, it wouldn't even look like it was, system changes aside.  I'd make it more like the Supernatural TV show, or Grimm or something similar.

Like being turned into a Vampire doesn't make you debonair and immediately gets you inducted into this cool, if cutthroat, community.  If you were a dork before you got turned, guess what?  You're still a dork, and you're likely going to be one for a very, very, very long time.

Which is why I say 'Burn it'.  Because I'd end up poking fun at some of the tropes, while trying to run it serious.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;862485If I were to reboot it, it wouldn't even look like it was, system changes aside.  I'd make it more like the Supernatural TV show, or Grimm or something similar.

I'd definitely want to play Hunter like Supernatural... or at least aspects of that show that I like... the early series where they were hunted by the law as well as the demons and things were looking bleak.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;862350Why not go with a revision of Palladium's (system)?

Aw, Bullwinkle, that trick NEVER works!

Quote from: Christopher Brady;862485Which is why I say 'Burn it'.  Because I'd end up poking fun at some of the tropes, while trying to run it serious.

Damn, you too?  I usually go camp, or Rob Zombie.  Had you seen lords of salem music video?  I imagine that art style when I play nWoD.

Though I am trying to create a scary rpg setting.  Code name is perception effect.  I am trying to get that Jacob's Ladder feel.  As in you think your seeing things, but your not sure.  It uses a lot of pseudoscience, but that is only because that is the closest way to explain it.  Mainly because people don't know what they are dealing with.

Though I got some ideas.

- Vampires = Murderous Ghosts
- Werewolves = Infectious blood link to alien eldritch gods
- Mages = Obsession can be a dangerous thing
- Frankenstein = Transhumanism gone horrible wrong

Quote from: tenbones;862314- Who gets the license?

Fucked if I know. Ken Hite should be involved, though, being my favorite horror and conspiracy RPG writer.

Quote from: tenbones;862314- What is the system?

ORE. Keeps the d10 dice pool while adding a saner resolution mechanic. In fact this is a hack I've considered more than once...

Quote from: tenbones;862314- How would you change it?

Keep all oWoD, nWoD, Exalted and Aeon lines in print, with lush, beautiful core rulebooks in print available at stores and support with stand-alone, location-based adventure modules and short, laser-focused monographs available via PDF/PoD.

Quote from: tenbones;862314So let's pretend Paradox pulls the license for World of Darkness from Onyx Path... for kicks and giggles tell me:

World of Darkness: Reloaded -

- Who gets the license?
- What is the system?
- How would you change it?

GO!

-Palladium
-Palladium
-Palladium!

It's by far the funnest result because of how many WoD swine would want to kill themselves on hearing the news.

Quote from: RPGPundit;863332-Palladium
-Palladium
-Palladium!

It's by far the funnest result because of how many WoD swine would want to kill themselves on hearing the news.

The real joke is that Palladium is more coherent. :D

JG

Well, I love Palladium (Nightbane even though I've never had a chance to play it, and Rifts which I've played a ton) and have played a ton of WoD as well.

Palladium has massive flaws (granted most of them are more editing issues and organization than problems with the system itself), but I'd much rather see WoD done with that system than with Savage Worlds.  

My dislike for Savage Worlds isn't so strong I'll turn a game down even if it's ran by a solid GM with a good group, but it's pretty low on the totem pole as far as systems I'd want to play.

This is almost certainly never going to happen in any case, though not too long ago I thought the same thing of Rifts and it ever having anything to do with any other system, and now Savage Worlds Rifts is going to be a thing (a thing I have absolutely 0 interest in, but a thing all the same).

Quote from: James Gillen;863342The real joke is that Palladium is more coherent. :D

JG

It is.... though maybe the most recent iteration of WoD has been made more so?  I stopped playing it beyond oWoD, and only have a small number of the first edition of the new WoD books, so my knowledge of the current game world is, well, lacking.

I think one thing that needs to be done in a new version of WoD is to make it much more coherent than any version I'm familiar with has been, and to not make it so strongly about one-creature-type games.  

In every Vampire or Werewolf game I've ever been in there's people wanting to play other things, and the game I had the most fun in was the one that said "oh what the hell, let's make this a big ridiculous kitchen sink and throw everything together". It was totally absurd, because the game wasn't intended to be played like that, but so much more fun.  If the game were actually made to work that way though, it would be much less absurd, work better mechanically, and maybe, just maybe, even more fun.

Now that it's been some years since I've played any WoD games, I can look back and see, there's a ton of other things I'd do differently, and yeah, that mostly comes down to my personal taste (and probably wouldn't make the game any better in most people's eyes), but making the different creatures less their own lines, and making things more coherent in the world would be a good step.

Quote from: Snowman0147;862499Damn, you too?  I usually go camp, or Rob Zombie.  Had you seen lords of salem music video?  I imagine that art style when I play nWoD.

Though I am trying to create a scary rpg setting.  Code name is perception effect.  I am trying to get that Jacob's Ladder feel.  As in you think your seeing things, but your not sure.  It uses a lot of pseudoscience, but that is only because that is the closest way to explain it.  Mainly because people don't know what they are dealing with.

Though I got some ideas.

- Vampires = Murderous Ghosts
- Werewolves = Infectious blood link to alien eldritch gods
- Mages = Obsession can be a dangerous thing
- Frankenstein = Transhumanism gone horrible wrong

I have similar ideas based on the indie game Feed. Feed is built around two things: the vampire as metaphor a la Monster Hearts (in this case addiction) and rules designed to support that metaphor, rather than promoting the writer's homebrew campaign setting. The backbone of the rules are two commandments: vampires must feed (not necessarily on blood) and the vampiric nature must oppose some other nature (in this case humanity). Other than that the actual metaphysical rules for vampirism are up to the group, which provides far greater flexibility. The second commandment is the basis for character traits: human traits are described in narrative terms rather than specific attributes and skills, and as the vampire's addiction worsens they replace human traits with vampiric ones.

This design paradigm sounds pretty good to me. The two commandments may be abstracted as "what do they DO?" and "what is the main conflict?" These two questions provide a starting point for other monster games. For example, lycanthropes "change" and "struggle between two worlds," whereas ghosts "haunt" and "struggle to move on with their lives." As for magic-users a good theme would be "power corrupts," but at this point I am running out of good metaphors.

Pundit did say magic users suffer from obsession while on the road to enlightenment.  So you can use struggle as obsession vs enlightenment.

Quote from: Snowman0147;863849Pundit did say magic users suffer from obsession while on the road to enlightenment.  So you can use struggle as obsession vs enlightenment.

That's not something you would reasonably expect a fairly normal person to experience or understand. Addiction, bereavement and so forth are things that most people have either gone through or know someone who has. This metaphor for a real world issue gives the game an extra layer of appeal. Esoteric subjects like "enlightenment" generally appeal to the more eccentric tastes. It is not something most writers write well, if at all. (Remember the flood of death threats when Mage: Revised was released? I do not want to attract those sorts of people.) The "dark magic versus light magic" theme, on the other hand, has greater cultural pull.

Quote from: tenbones;862314So let's pretend Paradox pulls the license for World of Darkness from Onyx Path... for kicks and giggles tell me:

World of Darkness: Reloaded -

- Who gets the license?
- What is the system?
- How would you change it?

GO!

Oh, it would certainly go to either Steve Hickey Games, the guys who made "Undying", or Andrew Medeiros' "Urban Shadows" - two WoD remakes under the Apocalypse World system. I haven't had a chance to play Undying yet, though it's basically all the political conflict of VtM with none of the cruft. Urban Shadows is in a similar vein, though it covers basically all of the splats.

These are both games that have done WoD better than WoD does, I think.

I'll check'em out!

Quote from: miedvied;863903Oh, it would certainly go to either Steve Hickey Games, the guys who made "Undying", or Andrew Medeiros' "Urban Shadows" - two WoD remakes under the Apocalypse World system. I haven't had a chance to play Undying yet, though it's basically all the political conflict of VtM with none of the cruft. Urban Shadows is in a similar vein, though it covers basically all of the splats.

These are both games that have done WoD better than WoD does, I think.

I think I once posted a list of urban fantasy games that were antecedents, contemporaries, heartbreakers, and reactions to World of Darkness. Basically, the antecedents and contemporaries came out shortly before or after but were not directly influenced by WoD (e.g. Nightlife, Nephilim, Immortal: Invisible War, Nightbane, In Nomine, Kult). The heartbreakers were directly influenced by it and range from suspiciously similar substitutes (e.g. C.J. Carella's Witchcraft, Armageddon), to parodies (e.g. Everlasting, Cold Hard World, Rapture: The Second Coming, Fireborn), to early retroclones (e.g. Opening the Dark), to rules lite (e.g. Jared Sorenson's Vampire, Blood Beast Man), to bad ripoffs (e.g. Vampire: Undeath). The newest games, the reactionaries, are loosely similar and generally better designed from a mechanical and thematic standpoint (e.g. Monsterhearts, Urban Shadows, Undying, Feed).

Ignoring for a moment all the detritus that has accumulated over the years, what statement encapsulates the essence of each World of Darkness title?

Vampire is, in both incarnations, about "A beast I am, lest a beast I become." They steadily lose their humanity and become monsters. IMO the rules did not support this well.

Werewolf is, in both incarnations, about dualism and balance. Werewolves are creatures of multiple conflicting natures (man vs beast, spirit vs flesh, rage vs harmony) that fight to preserve balance (stop the weaver and wyrm, police the boundaries).

Mage is, in both incarnations, about freedom versus control. The technocracy stifles and shepherds the masses while the traditions fight to give everyone the right to chose, the seers of the throne keep the masses ignorant of their potential while the diamond orders seek to unlock that same potential. There is moral ambiguity to both sides so YMMV.

Wraith is a metaphor for surviving great trauma, resolving your problems, coming to terms your grief and moving on with your life. Unfortunately, the writers and their metaplot obsession ended up making the game absurdly bleak above and beyond the basic premise. The sequel Orpheus takes a more proactive approach by expecting the characters to help ghosts crossover as a profession, at least until the metaplot took over.

The two incarnations of Changeling are too different to be directly compared. Dreaming is supposed to be about never giving up on your dreams even when life gets you down. Lost is about surviving and escaping human trafficking and building or rebuilding a new life without losing hope.

Mummy (but not Resurrection), I suppose, is about staying the same while the world moves on without you. I think it would be better to focus on Immortals in general rather than mummies specifically while trying carefully not to step on the toes of Vampire.

Hunter, in both incarnations, is about vigilantism and "he who fight monsters." Hunters fight monsters but may themselves exhibit metaphorically or even physically monstrous behavior. Monsters may not always be what they seem to be.

Like Changeling, the two incarnations of Demon are too different to compare. Fallen has demons waking up in the modern day, forced to adapt and driven to find a new purpose. Descent is about espionage against your former corporate employer while he sends bounty hunters after you.

Kindred of the East, Resurrection, Geist, and Inferno all deal with varying forms of bodily possession. Cathayans, Amenti, and sin-eaters were resurrected and now share their body with a passenger. The possessed sold their bodies for power. Cathayans and possessed deal with a rapacious selfish passenger, while Amenti and sin-eaters do not get much helping or hindering from their passenger aside from the resurrection and nifty powers. I do not find these games very interesting.

Promethean is about becoming a real boy. Of course there are tons of obstacles tacked on by the writers, but that is basically it.

Beast is about being a pretentious jerk. I am not joking, they are written to all be enormous jerks. Think all the worst parts of Dreaming with an extra helping of SJW agenda.

Deviant is about being a freak of nature. No, that's it. All the other miscellaneous monster concepts that involve a formerly normal person being mutated into a superhero go in here. Doctor Jekyll, the Invisible Man, Brundlefly, whatever.

At this point, I cannot write a heartbreaker or retroclone without relying heavily on something that has already been written. If I wanted to do "World of Darkness but better" then the best I can think of would be a mashup of Monsterhearts, Urban Shadows and Feed. Monsterhearts has the "monster as metaphor" formula refined to an art, Urban Shadows has politics and corruption supported by mechanics, and Feed all but redefines the relationship between mechanics and themes (it is the vampire equivalent of All Flesh Must Be Eaten).

Quote from: tenbones;862314So let's pretend Paradox pulls the license for World of Darkness from Onyx Path... for kicks and giggles tell me:

World of Darkness: Reloaded -

- Who gets the license?
- What is the system?
- How would you change it?

GO!

- Have no idea
- I'm fine with The Storyteller system but if Onyx Path retains it will go with their system that will be for Scion and Trinity
- Make it unified like Witchcraft, I'd be fine with going hidden as usual given NWoD 2e actually has the "why" make sense and be totally workable. Open is definitely doable but it'd be more like other existing games that are damn good, like Dresden Files, Shadowrun, Witchcraft etc.

None of which have the horror aspect. So I'd keep it a hidden world game like now.

Quote from: Simlasa;862493I'd definitely want to play Hunter like Supernatural... or at least aspects of that show that I like... the early series where they were hunted by the law as well as the demons and things were looking bleak.

Isn't this what Hunter the Vigil is (at least on Tier 1)? I mean single cell Hunter is like this, except without much of the lore. Hunter's setting is more conceptual. Monsters exist and hunters kill them. There is no origin story or history unless you import it.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;864118Ignoring for a moment all the detritus that has accumulated over the years, what statement encapsulates the essence of each World of Darkness title?

Vampire is, in both incarnations, about "A beast I am, lest a beast I become." They steadily lose their humanity and become monsters. IMO the rules did not support this well.

......entire post

Deviant is about being a freak of nature. No, that's it. All the other miscellaneous monster concepts that involve a formerly normal person being mutated into a superhero go in here. Doctor Jekyll, the Invisible Man, Brundlefly, whatever.

*Seriously? Deviant? Upcoming new game? They really don't know what they should come up with anymore, do they?

Anyway, all games have themes that rarely come up during play, get old hat pretty soon and are indeed (you are right) poorly supported mechanically.

I think most games focus on politics or conflicting views between factions. The summer court wants to fight danger, the autumn court wants to hide from it and the winter court wants to study danger and then fight it with magic. Mixed views creates internal conflict. I am usually more interested what's happening outside of these supernatural communities. Some games are more combat focused like Hunter and Werewolf, but the faction focus is always there. They should call it Mixed Views the Hassle.

Btw, aren't the so called "reactionaries" like Bleed and Urban Shadows just Storygames?

Ok here a list of five things I don't like about the WoD:

• Metaplot (oWoD)
• No rich backstory (nWoD)
• Flowerly language (both oWoD and nWoD)
• Bad layout (both editions)
• Not flexible enough (oWoD and nWoD*)

*NWoD has roughly the same setup as those Tropico games. You have different factions in those games like the capitalists, the socialists, the nationalists, the environmentalists etc. Those factions exist in every country around the world but are slightly different everywhere.
Well, that's the flexibility of the nWoD in a nutshell. Slightly adaptable factions. VtR Bombay is slightly different from VtR Moscow or VtR Buenos Aires. It's very limited and doesn't go beyond it's core concept.

So we need a company who can pull off either a very fleshed out rich background for modern horror/urban fantasy games or provide us with a real toolkit that can be used for whatever the GM wants. Preferably both.

Quote from: jan paparazzi;864528Ok here a list of five things I don't like about the WoD:

• Metaplot (oWoD)
• No rich backstory (nWoD)

What they need is a backstory that doesn't become a metaplot that you can't move out of. ;)

JG

Quote from: James Gillen;864596What they need is a backstory that doesn't become a metaplot that you can't move out of. ;)

JG

Yessss!. It's really simple to make. Make a short history chapter with events that are relevant to the players and then don't expend on it in supplements.

I would kill for a toolkit approach.  I still use Sine Nomine for many roll playing ideas due to the massive amount of tools the games provide.

Quote from: jan paparazzi;864802Yessss!. It's really simple to make. Make a short history chapter with events that are relevant to the players and then don't expend on it in supplements.

The problem with this approach is that you are still playing in someone else's sandbox. Unless said events are vague to the point of uselessness, it cannot support the level of creative freedom found in, say, All Flesh Must Be Eaten.

In fact, AFMBE is probably the best way to approach things. Rather than one restrictive sandbox, it has a multitude of campaign settings ("deadworlds") which each follow their own internal logic. These are never expanded on, but the limited space for each oozes more creativity than everything White Wolf wrote put together.

The whole "all monsters of X variety in my sandbox work this way" has gotten tired and stale to me. What happened to things like "5 different varieties of werewolves and 3 different varieties of vampire that have little to nothing in common" a la Dresden Files?

Quote from: Snowman0147;864833I would kill for a toolkit approach.  I still use Sine Nomine for many roll playing ideas due to the massive amount of tools the games provide.

God DAMN it, this.

Can't wait to get a Silent Legions-built CoC campaign. And a SWN-powered Traveller campaign.

Quote from: The Butcher;864966God DAMN it, this.

Can't wait to get a Silent Legions-built CoC campaign. And a SWN-powered Traveller campaign.

Yep. I'm running Masks of Nyarlathotep now, but once that puppy is wrapped up in a few months I can't wait to try Silent Legions. We need to find a way to clone Kevin Crawford so we can get even more Sine Nomine goodness published each year.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;864944The problem with this approach is that you are still playing in someone else's sandbox. Unless said events are vague to the point of uselessness, it cannot support the level of creative freedom found in, say, All Flesh Must Be Eaten.

In fact, AFMBE is probably the best way to approach things. Rather than one restrictive sandbox, it has a multitude of campaign settings ("deadworlds") which each follow their own internal logic. These are never expanded on, but the limited space for each oozes more creativity than everything White Wolf wrote put together.

The whole "all monsters of X variety in my sandbox work this way" has gotten tired and stale to me. What happened to things like "5 different varieties of werewolves and 3 different varieties of vampire that have little to nothing in common" a la Dresden Files?

Nah, not what I want at all. And here's why: as a central focal point monsters-as-PCs need some setting grounding. They can't be all mysterious all the time, otherwise you get Ethereal Plane, Dreamscape, issues. No shared patterns, no shared connection; in constant paranoia mode, devolves into numbness and farce.

First, they need to be relatable in a vaguely shared human sense so motivations and actions are not too alien to roleplay. A huge part of that is "we're the same species because we function with needs XYZ." That becomes a common language OOC to why their tension and pathos actually matter in a way we can relate to and thus conform to the horror genre. (It's why Deviants and other recent, unsympathetic monster lines reads so ridiculous; might as well flip open CoC Creature Compendium and play something from there in FATE.)

That lack of core identity mystery helps then fuel the second part which is IC cohesion creating a community. By having a broad in-group there is mutual commiseration about a shared existence, while fueling heated debate over how to approach that existence. It is quintessentially recreating the human condition. The community of monsters, mostly alike with minor variations, is the single greatest contribution to the "playing a monster" concept.

Yes, you can splat this out into endless factions from "races/strains," to "ideological factions." But the big thing about that general cohesiveness and quibbling friction is it's mostly infighting. It is not world view shattering knowledge of The Other Among Us, which sends things into paroxisms of paranoia and purification (that's the pathos challenge for monster hunters).

I much prefer a single voice for a setting, with lingering questions around the edges, instead of /shrug "who knows if anything you think you know is true?", Kafka-esque, butterfly dreaming of a man, vagaries. The latter is a cheap gimmick from those who want to save paper space and prioritize ambivalence over a point of view. But when everything is up in the air, nothing really begins to matter, and thus with endless chaos you get unrelatable boredom.

Quote from: Opaopajr;864970Nah, not what I want at all. And here's why: as a central focal point monsters-as-PCs need some setting grounding. They can't be all mysterious all the time, otherwise you get Ethereal Plane, Dreamscape, issues. No shared patterns, no shared connection; in constant paranoia mode, devolves into numbness and farce.

First, they need to be relatable in a vaguely shared human sense so motivations and actions are not too alien to roleplay. A huge part of that is "we're the same species because we function with needs XYZ." That becomes a common language OOC to why their tension and pathos actually matter in a way we can relate to and thus conform to the horror genre. (It's why Deviants and other recent, unsympathetic monster lines reads so ridiculous; might as well flip open CoC Creature Compendium and play something from there in FATE.)

That lack of core identity mystery helps then fuel the second part which is IC cohesion creating a community. By having a broad in-group there is mutual commiseration about a shared existence, while fueling heated debate over how to approach that existence. It is quintessentially recreating the human condition. The community of monsters, mostly alike with minor variations, is the single greatest contribution to the "playing a monster" concept.

Yes, you can splat this out into endless factions from "races/strains," to "ideological factions." But the big thing about that general cohesiveness and quibbling friction is it's mostly infighting. It is not world view shattering knowledge of The Other Among Us, which sends things into paroxisms of paranoia and purification (that's the pathos challenge for monster hunters).

I much prefer a single voice for a setting, with lingering questions around the edges, instead of /shrug "who knows if anything you think you know is true?", Kafka-esque, butterfly dreaming of a man, vagaries. The latter is a cheap gimmick from those who want to save paper space and prioritize ambivalence over a point of view. But when everything is up in the air, nothing really begins to matter, and thus with endless chaos you get unrelatable boredom.

That is not what I mean. All Flesh Must Be Eaten is characterized not by vagueness but by the large number of deadworlds it has. Each is unique and follows a consistent internal logic. There is no mystery because the rules for zombie-ism are clear from the outset. In one deadworld the zombies are corpses controlled by alien centipedes, in another they are ordinary people implanted with mind control microchips by a runaway theme park, in another they are unsubtle metaphors for McCarthyism red scares, blah blah, addicted to ice cream, superheroes/villains, reincarnation gone wrong, Christian apocalypse, and so forth.

THAT is the sort of creativity I want to see in a generic urban fantasy. I want people to actually CREATE and PLAY and not argue about GMPCs or fictional histories. Roleplaying games are not comic books or video games. They are limited only by the imagination of the players. So the players should be given the tools to adjudicate any vision they desire.

For an example of what I mean, download Feed. It is free and it is far more creative than Vampire: The Masquerade.

Those are just alternate premises, not fleshed out settings. That is not a creativity I need or want. It is something I myself can easily generate and later do in detail.

I buy games for settings more so than mechanics. Mechanics can be a horse's ass to learn and often not deliver. But some do. And other mechanics support the setting conceits baked into setting. As for mechanics I have my wealth of extant choices, from generic to those with baked in setting alterations — nothing all that special to me.

However enticing settings, with fleshed out slices of the world and interesting world-in-motion gear seeds, that's a challenge. That's a valuable resource to me. It saves me time.

Yes, ongoing NPC intertwined metaplot fiction reads like bad fiction. TMI is TMI and bad novelization is nothing I am interested in running (VtM novels affecting oWoD, for instance; Forgotten Realms Mary Sue parade is another). But no one tells you you have to use all of it, every character, and stick with its timeline.

It's like the same arguments I hear about FR products. Then don't use that material, hopefully the land and the main pool of acting factions and races are present to keep general cohesion going. It is easy to excise bad fiction tie-ins as long as I get a few cool location, actors, and hooks.

But things like FR 4e or Year of Reckoning/Gehenna are useless to me because they nuke the core setting of whole factions, races, continents, etc. I understand that argument. Those are terrible products on the whole in my opinion. Most of the "History of the Mary Sues' Adventures" is useless fluff yet easy to excise; setting nukes however backlog so much GM re-editing overhead that it makes compatibility issues with existing campagins.

I want a setting with a voice. I want a bushel of details to spice it, and edit as I please. I don't mind a few calendar events and main agents around either, as they are also easy to edit. I don't want apocalypse products inducing whole alternate histories.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;864989That is not what I mean. All Flesh Must Be Eaten is characterized not by vagueness but by the large number of deadworlds it has. Each is unique and follows a consistent internal logic. There is no mystery because the rules for zombie-ism are clear from the outset. In one deadworld the zombies are corpses controlled by alien centipedes, in another they are ordinary people implanted with mind control microchips by a runaway theme park, in another they are unsubtle metaphors for McCarthyism red scares, blah blah, addicted to ice cream, superheroes/villains, reincarnation gone wrong, Christian apocalypse, and so forth.

Isn't this just like the shards in WoD Mirrors or the chronicles in Danse Macabre or maybe even the city examples in Blood and Smoke (Requiem 2.0)? Or is it different? It sounds a bit like mini-settings to me.

A mini setting I am OK with, but it is not something I go out of my way to buy. I hope AFMBE is more mini setting, with at least 5 to 10 pages of ramifications spelled out, and then another sprinkling of gears, hooks, and seeds. A page or two of Locations and Notable NPCs would be nice, too.

But if it's less than that... meh. Just give me the core rule mechanics, any special mechanical gimmick that ties to setting, and get out of my way. And I'll likely end up discarding the system anyway because honestly I don't need more statistical formula crap when I have creative empty space to fill.

Quote from: jan paparazzi;865053Isn't this just like the shards in WoD Mirrors or the chronicles in Danse Macabre or maybe even the city examples in Blood and Smoke (Requiem 2.0)? Or is it different? It sounds a bit like mini-settings to me.

That's precisely what it is. "Campaign premise" might be a better word than "setting" in both cases, since there's plenty to inspire a GM, but little in the way of game table-ready material (except AFMBE deadworld write-ups usually include stats for one or more zombie types). But by that rationale, tons of well-established settings might not make the cut. ;)

Quote from: Opaopajr;865060A mini setting I am OK with, but it is not something I go out of my way to buy. I hope AFMBE is more mini setting, with at least 5 to 10 pages of ramifications spelled out, and then another sprinkling of gears, hooks, and seeds. A page or two of Locations and Notable NPCs would be nice, too.

But if it's less than that... meh. Just give me the core rule mechanics, any special mechanical gimmick that ties to setting, and get out of my way. And I'll likely end up discarding the system anyway because honestly I don't need more statistical formula crap when I have creative empty space to fill.

The problem with investing all your attention into a single campaign setting for a dark and edgy urban fantasy game is that it will inevitably be compared (unfavorably) with World of Darkness. Why would anyone want to play a ripoff when they can play the real thing? Games like Monsterhearts, Feed and Urban Shadows only have an audience because they do not have defined settings and instead focus on mechanics that support the themes they are trying to convey.

Anyone can write a campaign setting with npcs and a list of plot hooks. There are innumerable systemless settings that do that. I can make one up in an afternoon if I really tried. It takes real talent and skill to design game mechanics that support specific themes without sucking.

Quote from: The Butcher;864966God DAMN it, this.

Can't wait to get a Silent Legions-built CoC campaign. And a SWN-powered Traveller campaign.

I made a entire sci-fi setting with Stars Without Numbers.  Use the mutant rules to create alien race mechanics from Other Dust.  Finally used the fluff for those aliens in a Stars Without Numbers supplement.  Thirteen sectors of ass whooping with eight major factions and five races so far.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;865120The problem with investing all your attention into a single campaign setting for a dark and edgy urban fantasy game is that it will inevitably be compared (unfavorably) with World of Darkness. Why would anyone want to play a ripoff when they can play the real thing? Games like Monsterhearts, Feed and Urban Shadows only have an audience because they do not have defined settings and instead focus on mechanics that support the themes they are trying to convey.

Anyone can write a campaign setting with npcs and a list of plot hooks. There are innumerable systemless settings that do that. I can make one up in an afternoon if I really tried. It takes real talent and skill to design game mechanics that support specific themes without sucking.

They will be compared to WoD because that's the market leader. It even beats out Ravenloft in name recognition. But WoD does have a voice, "goth-punk," and it does not suit much other setting conceptions outside its lush/bleak world of incestuous infighting with looming apocalypse and blind status quo.

I need another set of rules to learn like I need a sexually transmitted disease. I'd rather be playing rpgs, not learning the ropes of another. And helping me save those afternoons of creative effort is the point, especially as I get older. Just like artists use models and photos/paintings to copy and then personalize, GMs do the same with setting material.

As far as I can see if anyone bring books to store shelves, then WoD won't be number one for long.  Let us not forget that both White Wolf and CCP shot themselves in the foot a few times.

Quote from: tenbones;862314So let's pretend Paradox pulls the license for World of Darkness from Onyx Path... for kicks and giggles tell me:

World of Darkness: Reloaded -

- Who gets the license?
- What is the system?
- How would you change it?

GO!

- DwD Studios
- d00Lite (Barebones Fantasy and Covert Ops)
- Making its more FABULOUS and Bizarre, Jojo's Bizarre Adventure style. With options of going full emo or full gonzo. Plus, its already happening in form of "Sigil & Shadow", it's in public playtest right now.

anyone know of a Savage Worlds homebrew of WoD?

Quote from: tenbones;865283anyone know of a Savage Worlds homebrew of WoD?

http://savagepedia.wikispaces.com/Werewolf+the+Apocalypse+Conversion (http://savagepedia.wikispaces.com/Werewolf+the+Apocalypse+Conversion)

http://savageheroes.com/conversions/vampire.htm (http://savageheroes.com/conversions/vampire.htm)

I haven't actually seen one for the full World of Darkness, though I know someone did one for Monte Cook's version of the WoD. You could probably find it by searching for "Savage World of Darkness."

I should also note that I haven't really looked at either of those conversions. I actually worked on my own SWoD game for awhile and I can say that, depending on just how faithful you want to be, my suggestion would be to use the newest Super Powers Companion to build the various archetypes as different "races." Vampires, werewolves, etc. are really little more than low-level supers, and you even have a somewhat free-form system for mages to cast all sorts of spells.

Quote from: Brand55;865286http://savagepedia.wikispaces.com/Werewolf+the+Apocalypse+Conversion (http://savagepedia.wikispaces.com/Werewolf+the+Apocalypse+Conversion)

http://savageheroes.com/conversions/vampire.htm (http://savageheroes.com/conversions/vampire.htm)

I haven't actually seen one for the full World of Darkness, though I know someone did one for Monte Cook's version of the WoD. You could probably find it by searching for "Savage World of Darkness."

I should also note that I haven't really looked at either of those conversions. I actually worked on my own SWoD game for awhile and I can say that, depending on just how faithful you want to be, my suggestion would be to use the newest Super Powers Companion to build the various archetypes as different "races." Vampires, werewolves, etc. are really little more than low-level supers, and you even have a somewhat free-form system for mages to cast all sorts of spells.

NICE!!! will check out!

Quote from: Snowman0147;865149As far as I can see if anyone bring books to store shelves, then WoD won't be number one for long.  Let us not forget that both White Wolf and CCP shot themselves in the foot a few times.

Most FLGS have gone out of business. Indeed, most bookstores have gone out of business. The consumer market has largely switched to tablet readers.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;865293Most FLGS have gone out of business. Indeed, most bookstores have gone out of business. The consumer market has largely switched to tablet readers.

I am not taking about just FLGS.  I am talking about major stores.

Quote from: The Butcher;865062That's precisely what it is. "Campaign premise" might be a better word than "setting" in both cases, since there's plenty to inspire a GM, but little in the way of game table-ready material (except AFMBE deadworld write-ups usually include stats for one or more zombie types). But by that rationale, tons of well-established settings might not make the cut. ;)

I have the feeling AFMBE has more radical different mini versions of the same setting than the WoD. WoD is always pretty focused by design and provides you with some variation of the core concept. I mean my homebrew hunter setting is more of a paranormal investigation setting focusing on ghosts and spirits and most hunter factions are either not there or used as enemies. I don't see a lot of people playing it like I do. I always feel it requires a lot of work to make it work.

Quote from: DarcyDettmann;865224- DwD Studios
- d00Lite (Barebones Fantasy and Covert Ops)
- Making its more FABULOUS and Bizarre, Jojo's Bizarre Adventure style. With options of going full emo or full gonzo. Plus, its already happening in form of "Sigil & Shadow", it's in public playtest right now.

Yeah that would be great too. Just as Sine Nomine a good no-nonsense practical developer. Probably easier to make what you wanna make of it.

Quote from: James Gillen;863342The real joke is that Palladium is more coherent. :D

JG

Only if you drank 5 fifths of whiskey, 4 cases of beer while smoking a pound of weed. One thing Palladium is not is coherent by any accepted definition of the term.

Quote from: Marleycat;865400Only if you drank 5 fifths of whiskey, 4 cases of beer while smoking a pound of weed. One thing Palladium is not is coherent by any accepted definition of the term.

We're not saying that Palladium is actually coherent, it's just MORE than Storyteller.

Quote from: Snowman0147;865298I am not taking about just FLGS.  I am talking about major stores.

I was including Barnes & Noble et al. They would have gone out of business without selling the Nook. Few customers actually buy physical books anymore unless no ebook version is available (even then that usually hurts sales of said book). They might browse at the store, sure, but most purchases will be ebooks.

Right now most roleplayers, particularly those who started after the market bubble burst of tabletop, are invested in digital forms of roleplay: chats, play by posts, choose your own adventures, etc. These usually involve in-house settings.

If you could market a game to that demographic somehow... How could you convince the online roleplayers to spend money on your game rather than keep making up their own?

Okay you got me.  So how would try to beat World of Darkness?

Quote from: Snowman0147;865983Okay you got me.  So how would try to beat World of Darkness?

I don't have any experience in marketing, unfortunately. From what little I can guess, it isn't possible to draw fans away from World of Darkness. The fans are invested in the setting regardless of how terrible the rules may become, much like fans of the oft-terrible DC/Marvel comics. The indie games have only gotten as far as they have (and that isn't a lot) because they appealed to those few deeply disappointed in World of Darkness' setting and rules.

To appeal to new demographics entirely (i.e. not trying to steal market share from Onyx Path, but find new markets) requires advertising to those demographics and keeping them interested in buying products. This is new territory since it originally developed independently of the tabletop industry, going all the way back to the original MUDs.