Quote from: Ulairi;980372Hero's Journey from Barrell Rider Games?

Oops! I forgot to push the latest updates to the site.

Yes, I have Hero's Journey - and now the listing is showing on the site. Thanks for checking!

Looking much better!

The person running this website is a racist who publicly advocates genocidal practices.

I am deleting my content.

I recommend you do the same.

Quote from: Justin Alexander;980647Never said you did. Ulairi did. I notice you then did the exact same thing with Pat, demonstrating an inability to keep track of who said what to who (including yourself). Try to keep track of a conversation if you're going to insist on making yourself look like an idiot in it.

It was a response to your direct reply to me with this quote:

Quote from: Justin AlexanderAnd when you answer that question by claiming that it is a game "in and of itself" and that it does not require the rules from D&D 5E to play it, you are full of shit.

Ulairi never said it was a game "in and of itself" in your citation either, by the way, so you are full of shit about that too. He merely said it was "a game", but you are too blinkered in your self-righteous opinion that you cannot make out that subtle difference. Moreover, you're the guy that took this thread down the whole 'full of shit' tone in the first place, so you are the idiot in chief here in any case - presenting yourself as some sort of overriding authority in a topic that is both a minor issue and a grey area.

Oh, and that Infinity RPG looks like a load of shit too - you're probably just pissed that nobody wants to mention it here.

I'm bemused that anyone would dig in his heels and defend the idea that a sourcebook requiring an actual game with rules is a game rather than merely a sourcebook Obviously it is not. Nobody would seriously claim that it was. Just admit you were wrong and move on. This isn't Congress where changing your mind and admitting you are wrong is verboten.

Quote from: Dumarest;980670I'm bemused that anyone would dig in his heels and defend the idea that a sourcebook requiring an actual game with rules is a game rather than merely a sourcebook Obviously it is not. Nobody would seriously claim that it was. Just admit you were wrong and move on. This isn't Congress where changing your mind and admitting you are wrong is verboten.

The arguments been had, and the distinction between something that supports or completes a particular game and something that simply utilises the ruleset of another line has been made. Adventures in Middle Earth doesn't actually supplement the D&D game. You are playing something distinct when you play it, but you do require basic rules in order to play it (which could be freely purchased, in terms of what is actually needed). Hence, in this case, the rules supplement the game and not the other way round. Someone also nominated Mindjammer using the Traveller rules above - same thing.

The linking of a game towards a particular ruleset is a marketing ploy, but they are not 'supplementing' another game if the outcome means you are no longer playing the original game. When you buy Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide, it actually supplements what exists in the D&D Player's Handbook. When you buy Adventures in Middle Earth, it doesn't. It is it's own game that requires reference to a rules document to play. A rules system is not a game in and of itself.

The person running this website is a racist who publicly advocates genocidal practices.

I am deleting my content.

I recommend you do the same.

The person running this website is a racist who publicly advocates genocidal practices.

I am deleting my content.

I recommend you do the same.

Quote from: Justin Alexander;981259EDIT: ... wait. Did you mean that I'm supposed to be pissed off that nobody has mentioned my non-indie game published in 2017 for a Best Indie RPG of 2016 award? Jesus. That's so dumb I wasn't even able to parse it as a coherent thought, let alone an insult.

It's an insult. Apparently your thought processes aren't coherent enough to even process that. It figures. This thread wasn't titled 'Best Indie RPG', but 'Best New RPG of 2016' - and your own inability to fulfil your kickstarter campaign in 2016 (as projected) is your own issue.

Quote... in a discussion directly relating to what Ulairi said.

You put a comment in quotation marks that literally nobody had said. Not me, nor Ulairi. Your squirming around what it was in relation to is irrelevant after this point - you were misquoting.

QuoteIn what sense? Dark Sun, Forgotten Realms, Ravenloft, and countless other D&D setting supplements have added new rules, classes, races, and the like. (And, in many cases, also removed options found in the core rulebooks.) There is no meaningful distinction between AiME and these other products that have been referred to unequivocally as supplements for 30+ years.

All these D&D settings are designed to make full use of the D&D core rules. The new rules presented in these products are designed to be supplemental the D&D core game. Adventures in Middle Earth is not designed to supplement the D&D game, barely uses any of the Player's Handbook in effect, but adapts the basic 5E mechanics to the Middle Earth game.

Mindjammer too may refer to itself as a supplement somewhere in the text, but what it's actually marketing itself as being is an adaptation of their IP setting to the Traveller ruleset. It's difficult to switch the rules presented in Mindjammer back into the core Traveller game as the assumptions are different. As such, it's not expanding the Traveller rules from the core, but developing them in a new direction.  A new game, as such. You could argue the same for DC Adventures making use of Mutants & Masterminds' rules. The only difference is that they provide a self contained ruleset (identical to M&M) because they have the licensing power to do so. However, it's still a demonstrably different game line.

I vote for The Sprawl, a cyberpunk PbtA game by Hamish Cameron. More info here: http://www.ardens.org/games/the-sprawl/

Quote from: TrippyHippy;981263It's an insult. Apparently your thought processes aren't coherent enough to even process that. It figures. This thread wasn't titled 'Best Indie RPG', but 'Best New RPG of 2016' - and your own inability to fulfil your kickstarter campaign in 2016 (as projected) is your own issue.

So the game didn't come out in 2016? Look, you either mock him for his game that came out in 2016 not being considered to be the best of 2016, or you can mock him for not having a game out in 2016, but you can't do both.

QuoteAll these D&D settings are designed to make full use of the D&D core rules. The new rules presented in these products are designed to be supplemental the D&D core game. Adventures in Middle Earth is not designed to supplement the D&D game, barely uses any of the Player's Handbook in effect, but adapts the basic 5E mechanics to the Middle Earth game.

So it is like a GURPS supplement?

Quote from: Baulderstone;981291So the game didn't come out in 2016? Look, you either mock him for his game that came out in 2016 not being considered to be the best of 2016, or you can mock him for not having a game out in 2016, but you can't do both.

Actually, it's proving to be quite easy...

QuoteSo it is like a GURPS supplement?

Nope. Because GURPS supplements make full use of the GURPS core rules. Case in point being GURPS: Traveller or GURPS: Castle Falkenstein, which ignored aspects of the original game design, and simply made the settings an accessory extension of the GURPS system. That said, I've still met plenty of gamers that liked the GURPS: Traveller 'game' but didn't care for the rest of the GURPS line, so in some cases the line can be blurred again.  

A more pertinent comparison would be:

Quote from: artikidI vote for The Sprawl, a cyberpunk PbtA game by Hamish Cameron. More info here: http://www.ardens.org/games/the-sprawl/

Which presents a cyberpunk setting with the established ruleset of PbtA, because they want to utilise and capture the PbtA system and market, respectively.....but it's still it's own game.

There is this confusion over what constitutes a 'game' here, but it isn't exclusively an issue of being a self contained set of rules - or AD&D Player's Handbook 1st edition wouldn't qualify either. As I said before, the D20 market in particular muddied the waters, while the same factors are present in products like Adventures in Middle Earth or Savage Worlds' 'games'.

The person running this website is a racist who publicly advocates genocidal practices.

I am deleting my content.

I recommend you do the same.

Quote from: TrippyHippy;980688The arguments been had, and the distinction between something that supports or completes a particular game and something that simply utilises the ruleset of another line has been made. Adventures in Middle Earth doesn't actually supplement the D&D game. You are playing something distinct when you play it, but you do require basic rules in order to play it (which could be freely purchased, in terms of what is actually needed). Hence, in this case, the rules supplement the game and not the other way round. Someone also nominated Mindjammer using the Traveller rules above - same thing.

The linking of a game towards a particular ruleset is a marketing ploy, but they are not 'supplementing' another game if the outcome means you are no longer playing the original game. When you buy Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide, it actually supplements what exists in the D&D Player's Handbook. When you buy Adventures in Middle Earth, it doesn't. It is it's own game that requires reference to a rules document to play. A rules system is not a game in and of itself.

This is hilarious. You really can't just admit you're wrong and just acknowledge the difference between a game you can play with no other books/boxes/products and a supplement requiring ownership of the game rules? No one will think less of you for having been incorrect; they may even think more highly of your ability to own up.

You should write speeches for politicians to explain why they didn't support X until they supported X while simultaneously they always supported X until they didn't.

[deleted]