Quote from: Consonant DudeWhat does this free VS pay stuff has to do with the conversation?

It demonstrates that geeks like to bitch. They complain about free stuff. Now, if they complain when they get it for free, they'll sure as shit complain when they pay for it. Geeks complain and bitch, more so than non-geeks, simply because they're passionate about a particular topic area. That passion can turn into the extremes of drooling fanboyz, or compulsive whinger.

Quote from: Consonant DudeFor every person that bitched, or (correctly) was indifferent, there were people who were (delusional and) excited about the product. That's the point of the thread! We're informed that this overhyped writer is working on a new product. Then people say whatever it is they have to say about that news.

And again, you're speaking without a real basis to what you're saying. A few geeks going "wow" hardly constitutes "overhyped." Some gamers think well of Robin Laws' writing. Now, you may suppose that because you think badly of his writing, and speculatively minimise any contributions he may have made to things you actually like, you may suppose that means that anyone who likes his writing is "delusional". But in general as adults we realise that if a person disagrees with us, they're not necessarily stupid or crazy, they may have sane reasons for their ideas. Particularly on something which is really a matter of personal taste - someone's writing.

But I am not saying that you should not bitch and moan. I am saying that your bitching and moaning, when added to that of a zillion other gamer geeks out there, will have the natural result of discouraging would-be writers. It's not going to discourage experienced guys like Robin Laws, but any newbie will be pretty flattened by it.

Quote from: Consonant DudeWhat the fuck? Back that shit up, man.

I already backed up what I said, that negative comments from people before books are even written will naturally discourage people from writing books. That is my experience, and I know several previous rpg writers who've chosen other careers after a short time writing rpgs, largely because of constant bitching by geeks. They say that between the poor money and the constant bitching, it's just not worth the trouble.

I don't think that's any remarkable claim, you hear similar things from teachers, for example - poor money plus constant bitching leads to them giving up.

Quote from: Consonant DudeWhy you are getting your panties in a bunch over this I don't understand.

Because I get tired of bitching and moaning. The game hasn't been written yet. Yet you're still bitching about it.

The question of Laws' credit on this book or that, it's not as clear-cut as you think it is. Even when you write a book supposedly alone, you often borrow ideas and get feedback from others, and sometimes don't know how much or little you should credit them.

Recently, for example, I was given a credit on Little Fears. I didn't know until someone wrote to me congratulating me on a fine product. I wrote to the authour, saying, "what?" He replied mentioning a couple of conversations we'd had. Apparently the game system he based on Bonza, and a few of the ideas I'd tossed out were key to his being able to finish the work. Looking at the work, he's actually used a couple of paragraphs of words I've written (I'd given him permission for this). But I didn't even remember these conversations until he reminded me. Words I'd forgotten I said in casual conversation got me credit on a book. So, a very small contribution from my point of view was a big one from the authour's point of view.

I know of another case where one authour was contracted to write a GURPS book, had some arguments with Steve Jackson, his friend took over the writing of the book, used the original guy's notes, and him as a sounding-board - but the original guy got no credit at all on the final product (that was the way he wanted it).

And then of course we have opinion columns, and Tom Clancy books, etc, written "with" so-and-so, but in fact written entirely by so-and-so, with the original person just giving their rubber stamp to it.

So authourship can be a difficult thing to pin down exactly. Don't be too quick to assume that Laws's contribution to a game you liked was close to zero. Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't. You can't know. Often the authours will argue this between them, as I did with the authour of Little Fears.

Quote from: Consonant DudeNow, could you please stop holding people responsible for your discouragement and do whatever the fuck you want with your writing? Because honestly, I've read you for a long while and you've never pulled any punch with anybody, about anything. That's how you like it and that's how I like it too.

Guys like you are responsible for my discouragement. I am responsible for what I do about that. In the end, pen to paper or fingers to keyboard is my decision, and mine alone. But I'm more concerned about those who've never published anything. I believe in encouraging people to try things out - that includes writing rpg material, if that's what they're interested in. Because of my encouragement another guy started publishing rpgs - and you know what? The guy's a better writer than me, and harder-working. If I'd talked to him like some bitter gamer, though, we'd not have his games. Maybe to you that'd be no loss; but others have enjoyed his stuff. Encouragement is good.

The nature of people pulling punches is much like the related issue of discretion. People don't know when you're doing it. If I keep silent about something, or refrain from saying something, nobody will know. So whether someone is discreet or pulls punches is not always entirely obvious.

I try to limit my punching to actual targets. So let's let Laws write his book, and then we'll read it, and maybe playtest it, and we can punch it or praise it then. The basic concepts of HeroQuest as it is are sound, there's nothing objectionable in them. Its flaws are its writing and organisation, with rules, play advice, and designer notes all mashed together. Let's see if Laws can tidy that up. Given the good organisation of the one project we definitely know he had a free hand in - Robin's Laws of Good Gamemastering - I think it's reasonable to be optimistic about the organisation of HeroQuest III - assuming he has a free hand.

Quote from: SpikeAnd I realized that other than the 'IDEA' of the game, I don't actually like it much at all.  There is good bits in there but most of it is poorly implemented.

I'm on the verge of finishing running a campaign with it and I've come to agree with you.  The setting is nine pounds of awesome in a ten pound bag, but the rules grind occasionally.  I'm not even sure I like the core mechanic, adding one die and subtracting another isn't as instant as some results

Next time I'm using Risus

Quote from: JimBobOzThe basic concepts of HeroQuest as it is are sound, there's nothing objectionable in them. Its flaws are its writing and organisation, with rules, play advice, and designer notes all mashed together. Let's see if Laws can tidy that up. Given the good organisation of the one project we definitely know he had a free hand in - Robin's Laws of Good Gamemastering - I think it's reasonable to be optimistic about the organisation of HeroQuest III - assuming he has a free hand.

So what it boils down to, is that you are looking forward to QuestWorlds. You have your reasons. And I completely respect that.

And I am not looking forward to it, based on having played and/or GMed Rune, Feng Shui, Dying Earth, HeroWars, HeroQuest and having read "Laws of Gamemastering".

I'm sorry if you can't respect that, or if it some sort of discouragement for you or any writer but that's still how I feel.

I'm genuinely surprised by your reaction in this thread. I really hope forums won't prevent you from writing. But that is up to you. Not to me or internet forums in general.