The President and COO of WOTC, will soon be leading Hasbro as CEO.
When upper management at WOTC, is promoted to be upper management at Hasbro...
Obviously Hasbro is completely onboard with the direction WOTC has taken.
Hasbro is not about to change WOTC's trajectory.
This has been going on since Hasborg absorbed WOTC.
Time and again Hasbro has given WOTC projects only for WOTC to botch it in ways small, or more often, big. And they seem to never learn from this that they should not be letting WOTC handle projects outside CCGs and RPGs and even these WOTC consistently screws up sooner or later.
Hasbro making a WOTC employee a Hasbro one may be because that person has worked on Hasbro projects before. Or it could be Hasbro again not learning that the scorpion will sting you eventually. Or they are getting progressively infiltrated by the SJW cult. With these two companies you never know anymore.
Could be all of the above.
WOTC's profits have gone through the roof with their licensing of IP and brand to other companies. I do not have the portfolio sheet in front of me to rattle off the exact number but WOTC's growth in licensing reoccuring revenue was light years ahead of what it's book sales were. WOTC's costs for licensing a property are small and they recoup a huge amount of cash and that looks very good on profit sheets. I also believe that WOTC was one of the few companies under Hasbro that had significant growth hence why the CEO of WOTC went to become the CEO of Hasbro: Fiscal success.
This pattern is similar to what Disney is doing with Marvel and Marvel Comics. Comics are utter trash but the IP and licensing profits are where the money is so Disney is just fine with letting SJW brigade run comics into the ground as long as the movies, tv shows, and other forms of media continue to generate net positive cash flow.
Quote from: THE_Leopold on January 19, 2022, 09:05:26 AM
This pattern is similar to what Disney is doing with Marvel and Marvel Comics. Comics are utter trash but the IP and licensing profits are where the money is so Disney is just fine with letting SJW brigade run comics into the ground as long as the movies, tv shows, and other forms of media continue to generate net positive cash flow.
Then they ran it into the dirt and sales are starting to drop and reviews are starting to be increasingly less flattering.
How long they can ride the IP train is right now iffy. And without the RPG t back it they lose a portion of their customer base and lose the main source of recognition.
I was confused about what this thread was about and the news was hard to find. It might help to give a link or something by way of explanation. In case anyone else was in the same boat:
QuoteChris Cocks, who served as president and chief operating officer of the company's Wizards of the Coast and digital gaming division, has been promoted to the top leadership position. He will take over the post from interim CEO Rich Stoddart on Feb. 25.
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/01/05/hasbro-taps-chris-cocks-as-new-ceo.html
Quote from: jhkim on January 19, 2022, 09:59:16 PM
I was confused about what this thread was about and the news was hard to find. It might help to give a link or something by way of explanation. In case anyone else was in the same boat:
QuoteChris Cocks, who served as president and chief operating officer of the company's Wizards of the Coast and digital gaming division, has been promoted to the top leadership position. He will take over the post from interim CEO Rich Stoddart on Feb. 25.
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/01/05/hasbro-taps-chris-cocks-as-new-ceo.html
Please forgive my failing to link to the story. I thought this crowd would have picked up on the story already.
The President and COO of WOTC, will soon be leading Hasbro as CEO.
Quote from: Jam The MF on January 18, 2022, 05:22:36 PM
The President and COO of WOTC, will soon be leading Hasbro as CEO.
When upper management at WOTC, is promoted to be upper management at Hasbro...
Obviously Hasbro is completely onboard with the direction WOTC has taken.
Hasbro is not about to change WOTC's trajectory.
What do we know about this Cocks *snicker* guy? This sounds like typical upper management stuff.
The gist of the thread, is that the person who will be running Hasbro really soon; is the same person who was leading WOTC as they undertook the wokification of D&D 5E, the rewrite of their past content, and the demonization of traditional D&D lore.
In the past, I've seen posts suggesting that Hasbro probably has WOTC on a tight leash. Suggesting that they wouldn't allow WOTC to alienate their biggest fans. Uhhhh.... Their new leader isn't going to turn around and condemn what was done under his own leadership. The course is set. It's full steam ahead. Woke, here we come!!!
Quote from: Jam The MF on January 20, 2022, 04:13:25 AM
The gist of the thread, is that the person who will be running Hasbro really soon; is the same person who was leading WOTC as they undertook the wokification of D&D 5E, the rewrite of their past content, and the demonization of traditional D&D lore.
In the past, I've seen posts suggesting that Hasbro probably has WOTC on a tight leash. Suggesting that they wouldn't allow WOTC to alienate their biggest fans. Uhhhh.... Their new leader isn't going to turn around and condemn what was done under his own leadership. The course is set. It's full steam ahead. Woke, here we come!!!
I dunno. WoTC has done very well since 2016, but it's not the uber-Woke stuff that sells like hot cakes. I think Cocks will focus on branding & licencing, not on pushing Wokeness into everything at Hasbro. And WoTC will keep on doing what it's doing as long as it makes money. But if the Woke starts noticeably hurting profits it will get pulled back, as has happened at Disney.
Quote from: Jam The MF on January 20, 2022, 04:13:25 AM
In the past, I've seen posts suggesting that Hasbro probably has WOTC on a tight leash. Suggesting that they wouldn't allow WOTC to alienate their biggest fans. Uhhhh.... Their new leader isn't going to turn around and condemn what was done under his own leadership. The course is set. It's full steam ahead. Woke, here we come!!!
Who has said Hasbro has WOTC on a tight leash? All evidence is the diametric opposite.
Now Hasbro has indeed put WOTC on a very tight financial leash whenever they screw up enough that it hurts Hasbros wallet. This I know from talking to some former staff. But they seem to suffer chronic amnesia and eventually forget that with WOTC failure is the only option. WOTC can not stand success and will sooner or later kill the goose that lays the golden eggs not to get the eggs but because the goose laying golden eggs is a bad thing.
Cocks is the guy spearheading the "D&D as Lifestyle" for casual gamers.
I think he's doing really well. Given the fact that neutering what D&D was to being the McDonalds of TTRPGs is no small feat. But it also speaks precisely to what D&D is and will be going forward.
It should surprise *no one* here.
Quote from: Omega on January 19, 2022, 06:40:30 PM
Quote from: THE_Leopold on January 19, 2022, 09:05:26 AM
This pattern is similar to what Disney is doing with Marvel and Marvel Comics. Comics are utter trash but the IP and licensing profits are where the money is so Disney is just fine with letting SJW brigade run comics into the ground as long as the movies, tv shows, and other forms of media continue to generate net positive cash flow.
Then they ran it into the dirt and sales are starting to drop and reviews are starting to be increasingly less flattering.
They literally just had the second biggest movie ever, and that in the midst of an epic meltdown in that movie industry otherwise. I mean, I know people love to bloviant bullshit here but you're so astronomically full of shit on this topic.
Quote from: Jam The MF on January 20, 2022, 04:13:25 AM
The gist of the thread, is that the person who will be running Hasbro really soon; is the same person who was leading WOTC as they undertook the wokification of D&D 5E, the rewrite of their past content, and the demonization of traditional D&D lore.
Almost everything they did involved MTG.
I mean what is so fucking hilarious about this thread is people who routinely claim, "Get Woke Go Broke" is a real thing are simultaneously trying to argue that WOTC - which has done INCREDIBLY well in recent years, far better than Hasbro itself - is also too woke and going broke because of it.
I don't even think you fuckers keep track of which positions you take anymore.
Takes a cock to lead a company full of them.
Quote from: Mistwell on January 20, 2022, 09:54:25 PM
Quote from: Jam The MF on January 20, 2022, 04:13:25 AM
The gist of the thread, is that the person who will be running Hasbro really soon; is the same person who was leading WOTC as they undertook the wokification of D&D 5E, the rewrite of their past content, and the demonization of traditional D&D lore.
Almost everything they did involved MTG.
I mean what is so fucking hilarious about this thread is people who routinely claim, "Get Woke Go Broke" is a real thing are simultaneously trying to argue that WOTC - which has done INCREDIBLY well in recent years, far better than Hasbro itself - is also too woke and going broke because of it.
I don't even think you fuckers keep track of which positions you take anymore.
Spoiler: They don't keep track, and they also don't care if they're correct or not, they just want a place to put their own special brand of incel virtue signalling and this place offers it for them.
I routinely come here to get a full bore view of what is being said in unmoderated disussion groups and I am frequenly entertained by the dumbest fucking takes in the world by doing so such as all the bitching and crying over how things are going woke and how they somehow think that their insular reactionary bubble clearly MUST represent the majority opinion even in the face of proof that WotC and D&D is doing better as a gaming brand than literally any other gaming IP in history with the sole exception of Pokemon... which WotC is also responsible for kickstarting.
Oh fuck Off you disingenuous SJW twats.
Your allowed to be stereotypical SJW Wokescolds and tell everyone and anyone what yo say and think, whether they want to hear it or not. Even if they did nothing wrong, sometimes just for having a difference of opinion. While also crafting carefully constructed personal narratives where if it includes anything that goes against to be summarily ignored and cancelled.
So take your Normie victim narrative virtue signalling pearl clutching bullshit and shove it as far up your anal retentive asses.
DefNotAnInsiderNopeNoWay is ignored due to being a self important bore
Quote from: DefNotAnInsiderNopeNoWay on January 21, 2022, 04:40:05 PM
Quote from: Mistwell on January 20, 2022, 09:54:25 PM
Quote from: Jam The MF on January 20, 2022, 04:13:25 AM
The gist of the thread, is that the person who will be running Hasbro really soon; is the same person who was leading WOTC as they undertook the wokification of D&D 5E, the rewrite of their past content, and the demonization of traditional D&D lore.
Almost everything they did involved MTG.
I mean what is so fucking hilarious about this thread is people who routinely claim, "Get Woke Go Broke" is a real thing are simultaneously trying to argue that WOTC - which has done INCREDIBLY well in recent years, far better than Hasbro itself - is also too woke and going broke because of it.
I don't even think you fuckers keep track of which positions you take anymore.
Spoiler: They don't keep track, and they also don't care if they're correct or not, they just want a place to put their own special brand of incel virtue signalling and this place offers it for them.
Whatever you think of the crowd here, "incel" has never struck me in any way as an accurate representation of the people who frequent this board. They are on average, 1) not young, 2) consider themselves plenty able to attract sexual partners (and are often married), and 3) are in no way hostile toward people who are sexually active.
Quote from: Mistwell on January 21, 2022, 05:45:47 PM
Quote from: DefNotAnInsiderNopeNoWay on January 21, 2022, 04:40:05 PM
Quote from: Mistwell on January 20, 2022, 09:54:25 PM
Quote from: Jam The MF on January 20, 2022, 04:13:25 AM
The gist of the thread, is that the person who will be running Hasbro really soon; is the same person who was leading WOTC as they undertook the wokification of D&D 5E, the rewrite of their past content, and the demonization of traditional D&D lore.
Almost everything they did involved MTG.
I mean what is so fucking hilarious about this thread is people who routinely claim, "Get Woke Go Broke" is a real thing are simultaneously trying to argue that WOTC - which has done INCREDIBLY well in recent years, far better than Hasbro itself - is also too woke and going broke because of it.
I don't even think you fuckers keep track of which positions you take anymore.
Spoiler: They don't keep track, and they also don't care if they're correct or not, they just want a place to put their own special brand of incel virtue signalling and this place offers it for them.
Whatever you think of the crowd here, "incel" has never struck me in any way as an accurate representation of the people who frequent this board. They are on average, 1) not young, 2) consider themselves plenty able to attract sexual partners (and are often married), and 3) are in no way hostile toward people who are sexually active.
Greetings!
Yeah, Mistwell! That's right. Come to think of it--I can't think of anyone here who isn't married or has a girlfriend. Maybe a bare few don't. Everyone else though seems to be doing just fine with women.
"Incel". *Laughing* What a moron.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Quote from: DefNotAnInsiderNopeNoWay on January 21, 2022, 04:40:05 PM
Quote from: Mistwell on January 20, 2022, 09:54:25 PM
Quote from: Jam The MF on January 20, 2022, 04:13:25 AM
The gist of the thread, is that the person who will be running Hasbro really soon; is the same person who was leading WOTC as they undertook the wokification of D&D 5E, the rewrite of their past content, and the demonization of traditional D&D lore.
Almost everything they did involved MTG.
I mean what is so fucking hilarious about this thread is people who routinely claim, "Get Woke Go Broke" is a real thing are simultaneously trying to argue that WOTC - which has done INCREDIBLY well in recent years, far better than Hasbro itself - is also too woke and going broke because of it.
I don't even think you fuckers keep track of which positions you take anymore.
Spoiler: They don't keep track, and they also don't care if they're correct or not, they just want a place to put their own special brand of incel virtue signalling and this place offers it for them.
I routinely come here to get a full bore view of what is being said in unmoderated disussion groups and I am frequenly entertained by the dumbest fucking takes in the world by doing so such as all the bitching and crying over how things are going woke and how they somehow think that their insular reactionary bubble clearly MUST represent the majority opinion even in the face of proof that WotC and D&D is doing better as a gaming brand than literally any other gaming IP in history with the sole exception of Pokemon... which WotC is also responsible for kickstarting.
To speak of the dumbest fucking takes you should be careful not to be one of the dumbest fucking morons ever to grace this forum. And I'll prove you are, because assertions aren't enough:
Reactionary is a person that's part of the establishment and is reacting against changes in the status quo.
WotC is the status quo, and it's totally woke. Like most of the megacorporations, media and politicians. Therefore those who oppose the woke can't be reactionaries, we're the revolution, you are the establishment; and you're deadly affraid because you know your hold in the society is tenuous and slipping through your fingers every minute.
Quote from: tenbones on January 20, 2022, 05:16:37 PM
Cocks is the guy spearheading the "D&D as Lifestyle" for casual gamers.
I think he's doing really well. Given the fact that neutering what D&D was to being the McDonalds of TTRPGs is no small feat. But it also speaks precisely to what D&D is and will be going forward.
It should surprise *no one* here.
Thing is. So far all WOTC's "lifestyle" gig has been nothing but chirping a buzzword and essentially monetizing fan works. You know. Those things that have been around pretty much forever and well before RPG? Yeah, those.
So far WOTC has done less than TSR ever did.
At least two action figure lines.
At least one candy brand.
A few toys like Colorforms.
Colouringbooks.
Childrens books.
Mugs, pencils, and a few oddities.
And I am not counting actual game products like dice, minis, novels, wargames, board games or PC games.
WOTC has so far produced surprisingly little.
Colouring books (but only as obscure PDFs as of last check?)
Childrens books (also only as obscure PDFs only?)
Mugs, Pencils and alot of oddieties like plushes. A large majority of which turns out to be essentially fan crafting that WOTC is licensing somehow.
I am honestly surprised at the lack of action figures and toys.
They talk the talk but dont walk the walk.
Which is weird because they have access to Hasbro. Then again the longer they posture but dont act. The better.
Quote from: Mistwell on January 20, 2022, 09:54:25 PM
I mean what is so fucking hilarious about this thread is people who routinely claim, "Get Woke Go Broke" is a real thing are simultaneously trying to argue that WOTC - which has done INCREDIBLY well in recent years, far better than Hasbro itself - is also too woke and going broke because of it.
I don't even think you fuckers keep track of which positions you take anymore.
1: But are they doing as well now that they have started fucking with everything as they did on 5e's release?
No.
Sales of new books are not as grand as prior. And theres been a small, but notable drop off with each new and more woke proclaimed product. Which often turns out to be not as woke as they crow. Sometimes very not.
WOTC is still riding the wave of 5e's ealy success and goodwill. But that wave is losing momentum and WOTC is hellbent on making it lose momentum faster. Perhaps they think they can leech off the licensing deals. But how long can they suck the life from that before it gives up the ghost.
2: More than a few here have near pavlovian rabid reactions to anything WOTC does and tend to blow even the slightest rumor out of proportion.
Whats really hilarious is that these woke companies are playing them like puppets. They toss out just enough buzzwords to get em frothing a the mouth. Then the actual product barely has the things claimed would be there.
Marketing banks on this.
And wins nigh every time.
Quote from: Omega on January 21, 2022, 08:48:59 PM
Quote from: Mistwell on January 20, 2022, 09:54:25 PM
I mean what is so fucking hilarious about this thread is people who routinely claim, "Get Woke Go Broke" is a real thing are simultaneously trying to argue that WOTC - which has done INCREDIBLY well in recent years, far better than Hasbro itself - is also too woke and going broke because of it.
I don't even think you fuckers keep track of which positions you take anymore.
1: But are they doing as well now that they have started fucking with everything as they did on 5e's release?
No.
Sales of new books are not as grand as prior. And theres been a small, but notable drop off with each new and more woke proclaimed product.
I don't have any sales figures, but from what I've read of industry professionals, *every* RPG has a drop off as the edition continues. There's always far less interest in the 17th supplement for an edition than in the core books. This is known as the "Supplement Treadmill" in RPG publishing.
https://thealexandrian.net/wordpress/2846/roleplaying-games/thought-of-the-day-supplement-treadmill
The fundamental problem is that an RPG's market saturates fairly quickly. After people have bought the core books, they don't tend to buy at the same rate. Even successful new supplement lines only appeal to a fraction of the player base - and the base tends to get more and more fragmented into different settings or variants, which means smaller and smaller sales.
The big question is - how does the 5e dropoff compare to other edition dropoffs? I don't know that directly. The WotC stockholder profit reports sound quite positive. Do you have other information sources on sales, Omega?
Quote from: jhkim on January 21, 2022, 09:39:31 PM
Quote from: Omega on January 21, 2022, 08:48:59 PM
Quote from: Mistwell on January 20, 2022, 09:54:25 PM
I mean what is so fucking hilarious about this thread is people who routinely claim, "Get Woke Go Broke" is a real thing are simultaneously trying to argue that WOTC - which has done INCREDIBLY well in recent years, far better than Hasbro itself - is also too woke and going broke because of it.
I don't even think you fuckers keep track of which positions you take anymore.
1: But are they doing as well now that they have started fucking with everything as they did on 5e's release?
No.
Sales of new books are not as grand as prior. And theres been a small, but notable drop off with each new and more woke proclaimed product.
I don't have any sales figures, but from what I've read of industry professionals, *every* RPG has a drop off as the edition continues. There's always far less interest in the 17th supplement for an edition than in the core books. This is known as the "Supplement Treadmill" in RPG publishing.
https://thealexandrian.net/wordpress/2846/roleplaying-games/thought-of-the-day-supplement-treadmill
The fundamental problem is that an RPG's market saturates fairly quickly. After people have bought the core books, they don't tend to buy at the same rate. Even successful new supplement lines only appeal to a fraction of the player base - and the base tends to get more and more fragmented into different settings or variants, which means smaller and smaller sales.
The big question is - how does the 5e dropoff compare to other edition dropoffs? I don't know that directly. The WotC stockholder profit reports sound quite positive. Do you have other information sources on sales, Omega?
Off course you're going to ignore or pretend to not know WotC's bread and butter is MtG and not D&D.
Marvel Comics sell like shit, and yet Marvel IS making money hand over fists thanks to the movies, toys, etc. One division under Disney is going broke but kept afloat by all the other divisions; therefore Marvel Comics isn't going broke according to you.
Quote from: Mistwell on January 20, 2022, 09:54:25 PM
Quote from: Jam The MF on January 20, 2022, 04:13:25 AM
The gist of the thread, is that the person who will be running Hasbro really soon; is the same person who was leading WOTC as they undertook the wokification of D&D 5E, the rewrite of their past content, and the demonization of traditional D&D lore.
Almost everything they did involved MTG.
I mean what is so fucking hilarious about this thread is people who routinely claim, "Get Woke Go Broke" is a real thing are simultaneously trying to argue that WOTC - which has done INCREDIBLY well in recent years, far better than Hasbro itself - is also too woke and going broke because of it.
I don't even think you fuckers keep track of which positions you take anymore.
Care to provide any quote qhere someone is saying what you claim we're saying?
As far as I know nobody here has said WotC is going broke, because we know they make more money from MtG AND licensing than from D&D. What people here HAVE said is that new D&D books (settings, etc.) are not selling that good. Because everything woke turns into shit.
Quote from: DefNotAnInsiderNopeNoWay on January 21, 2022, 04:40:05 PM
Quote from: Mistwell on January 20, 2022, 09:54:25 PM
Quote from: Jam The MF on January 20, 2022, 04:13:25 AM
The gist of the thread, is that the person who will be running Hasbro really soon; is the same person who was leading WOTC as they undertook the wokification of D&D 5E, the rewrite of their past content, and the demonization of traditional D&D lore.
Almost everything they did involved MTG.
I mean what is so fucking hilarious about this thread is people who routinely claim, "Get Woke Go Broke" is a real thing are simultaneously trying to argue that WOTC - which has done INCREDIBLY well in recent years, far better than Hasbro itself - is also too woke and going broke because of it.
I don't even think you fuckers keep track of which positions you take anymore.
Spoiler: They don't keep track, and they also don't care if they're correct or not, they just want a place to put their own special brand of incel virtue signalling and this place offers it for them.
I routinely come here to get a full bore view of what is being said in unmoderated disussion groups and I am frequenly entertained by the dumbest fucking takes in the world by doing so such as all the bitching and crying over how things are going woke and how they somehow think that their insular reactionary bubble clearly MUST represent the majority opinion even in the face of proof that WotC and D&D is doing better as a gaming brand than literally any other gaming IP in history with the sole exception of Pokemon... which WotC is also responsible for kickstarting.
The cost of letting people speak their minds is that you may encounter someone you strongly disagree with. It amuses me when some (notably few) posters seem to have a meltdown over such spaces even existing.
Quote from: Omega on January 21, 2022, 08:48:59 PM
Quote from: Mistwell on January 20, 2022, 09:54:25 PM
I mean what is so fucking hilarious about this thread is people who routinely claim, "Get Woke Go Broke" is a real thing are simultaneously trying to argue that WOTC - which has done INCREDIBLY well in recent years, far better than Hasbro itself - is also too woke and going broke because of it.
I don't even think you fuckers keep track of which positions you take anymore.
1: But are they doing as well now that they have started fucking with everything as they did on 5e's release?
No.
Yes. UNQUESTIONABLY yes. We know this, with certainty. It's doing WAY WAY WAY better than when 5e was released. We have solid quarterly reports on that, which are covered by FTC truth in statement reports. Their total D&D sales per year have gone WAY up over time. They JUST had their biggest year ever, and the year prior to that was also a biggest year ever to date.
That you think it's doing worse now than at the beginning of 5e just shows once again the people who post here have no fucking idea what's actually going on in the RPG world. It would be pretty fucking impossible to be under the belief it's doing worse now than at the beginning of 5e if you were doing anything other than living under a metaphorical RPG rock.
I also think the people who post here just don't even think about digital sales anymore. Which is ironic since for indie games digital sales are the gold standard and indie games are discussed a ton here. But when it comes to WOTC, I think that thought just goes right out of people's minds.
Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 21, 2022, 09:57:34 PM
Quote from: jhkim on January 21, 2022, 09:39:31 PM
The big question is - how does the 5e dropoff compare to other edition dropoffs? I don't know that directly. The WotC stockholder profit reports sound quite positive. Do you have other information sources on sales, Omega?
Off course you're going to ignore or pretend to not know WotC's bread and butter is MtG and not D&D.
As I said, I don't have direct evidence. However, it sounds like your premise is that WotC are completely incompetent and losing tons of money stupidly in their D&D business, while making huge profits in the MtG business. That seems less likely to me than their being at least reasonably competent in their D&D marketing.
This has nothing to do with personal taste or moral judgements. There are tons of corporations whose products and/or business practices I hate - but I still acknowledge that they are successful at making money.
Quote from: Mistwell on January 21, 2022, 10:21:58 PM
Quote from: Omega on January 21, 2022, 08:48:59 PM
Quote from: Mistwell on January 20, 2022, 09:54:25 PM
I mean what is so fucking hilarious about this thread is people who routinely claim, "Get Woke Go Broke" is a real thing are simultaneously trying to argue that WOTC - which has done INCREDIBLY well in recent years, far better than Hasbro itself - is also too woke and going broke because of it.
I don't even think you fuckers keep track of which positions you take anymore.
1: But are they doing as well now that they have started fucking with everything as they did on 5e's release?
No.
Yes. UNQUESTIONABLY yes. We know this, with certainty. It's doing WAY WAY WAY better than when 5e was released. We have solid quarterly reports on that, which are covered by FTC truth in statement reports. Their total D&D sales per year have gone WAY up over time. They JUST had their biggest year ever, and the year prior to that was also a biggest year ever to date.
That you think it's doing worse now than at the beginning of 5e just shows once again the people who post here have no fucking idea what's actually going on in the RPG world. It would be pretty fucking impossible to be under the belief it's doing worse now than at the beginning of 5e if you were doing anything other than living under a metaphorical RPG rock.
I also think the people who post here just don't even think about digital sales anymore. Which is ironic since for indie games digital sales are the gold standard and indie games are discussed a ton here. But when it comes to WOTC, I think that thought just goes right out of people's minds.
At the launch of D&D 5E; there were 3 core books, a 2 volume adventure, and the Starter Set to drive numbers. Many other adventure books have released in the numerous years since; plus 2 additional monster manuals, a handful of setting books, a handful of rules expansion books, a new boxed adventure for new players, multiple DM Screens, and more. Just looking at print sales alone, there is now an entire catalog of offerings on the market. I'm sure "total" book sales numbers might be higher right now, than they were at the first launch of 5E; but what about comparing just the sales numbers of the core 3 books over time? That's a better indicator of the growth of the player base.
The PHB, MM, and DMG sales numbers indicate the growth of the player base. At least the serious players, anyway.
Quote from: jhkim on January 21, 2022, 10:52:02 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 21, 2022, 09:57:34 PM
Quote from: jhkim on January 21, 2022, 09:39:31 PM
The big question is - how does the 5e dropoff compare to other edition dropoffs? I don't know that directly. The WotC stockholder profit reports sound quite positive. Do you have other information sources on sales, Omega?
Off course you're going to ignore or pretend to not know WotC's bread and butter is MtG and not D&D.
As I said, I don't have direct evidence. However, it sounds like your premise is that WotC are completely incompetent and losing tons of money stupidly in their D&D business, while making huge profits in the MtG business. That seems less likely to me than their being at least reasonably competent in their D&D marketing.
This has nothing to do with personal taste or moral judgements. There are tons of corporations whose products and/or business practices I hate - but I still acknowledge that they are successful at making money.
Care to point exactly where I say they are loosing money on D&D let alone stupidly loosing tons of it?
I just pointed to the fact that WotC makes lots more money from MtG, ergo it's their bread and butter. Everything else you pulled out of your ass to build a strawman. And you can't even do that right...
Quote from: SHARK on January 21, 2022, 07:05:08 PM
Greetings!
Yeah, Mistwell! That's right. Come to think of it--I can't think of anyone here who isn't married or has a girlfriend. Maybe a bare few don't. Everyone else though seems to be doing just fine with women.
"Incel". *Laughing* What a moron.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Well I'm divorced (yaay!), a father (with equal custody), and I ignored my ex girlfriend from 2019-2020 when she PM'd & tried to get back with me last week. Does that make me a VolCel? ;D
Quote from: jhkim on January 21, 2022, 09:39:31 PM
The big question is - how does the 5e dropoff compare to other edition dropoffs?
5e actually has been holding up very well AFAICT - it has great 'legs', which seems to have been part of the (Mearls-led) plan 2012-14. While I don't think Crawford's recent messing around with 5e has helped sales, I doubt it has impacted sales much either. I don't think his more Woke recent material has sold particularly well, but I don't think that has harmed the overall bottom line very much yet either. While a grognard like me gets upset over the removal of racial attribute bonuses, I don't think that kind of thing has any impact on new players.
I do think that Woke makes everything dreary and that this ultimately has a repellent effect on the mass market. But 5e was not particularly Woke at inception, and has a lot of momentum. I think Crawford has helped initiate a very slow gradual decline, I don't think stuff like Strixhaven is selling very well, but I would not expect to see a big drop off for several years on current trajectory. If Crawford pushes Woke too hard then the 2024 re-release may not do as well as expected. But whether Hasbro will push a course correction even then, I don't know.
I do think that compared to a mass market corporation like Disney, a large proportion of WotC's customers are likely more accepting of Woke elements. But still, there are very few SJWs in real life, and people play D&D at the table to have fun, not to virtue signal. So it can certainly go too far even for WotC.
Quote from: jhkim on January 21, 2022, 10:52:02 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 21, 2022, 09:57:34 PM
Quote from: jhkim on January 21, 2022, 09:39:31 PM
The big question is - how does the 5e dropoff compare to other edition dropoffs? I don't know that directly. The WotC stockholder profit reports sound quite positive. Do you have other information sources on sales, Omega?
Off course you're going to ignore or pretend to not know WotC's bread and butter is MtG and not D&D.
As I said, I don't have direct evidence. However, it sounds like your premise is that WotC are completely incompetent and losing tons of money stupidly in their D&D business, while making huge profits in the MtG business. That seems less likely to me than their being at least reasonably competent in their D&D marketing.
It used to be true that MTG dominated D&D, but that has not been true for several years, as Mistwell will no doubt explain with much gloating. ;D
Quote from: DefNotAnInsiderNopeNoWay on January 21, 2022, 04:40:05 PM
Quote from: Mistwell on January 20, 2022, 09:54:25 PM
Quote from: Jam The MF on January 20, 2022, 04:13:25 AM
The gist of the thread, is that the person who will be running Hasbro really soon; is the same person who was leading WOTC as they undertook the wokification of D&D 5E, the rewrite of their past content, and the demonization of traditional D&D lore.
Almost everything they did involved MTG.
I mean what is so fucking hilarious about this thread is people who routinely claim, "Get Woke Go Broke" is a real thing are simultaneously trying to argue that WOTC - which has done INCREDIBLY well in recent years, far better than Hasbro itself - is also too woke and going broke because of it.
I don't even think you fuckers keep track of which positions you take anymore.
Spoiler: They don't keep track, and they also don't care if they're correct or not, they just want a place to put their own special brand of incel virtue signalling and this place offers it for them.
I routinely come here to get a full bore view of what is being said in unmoderated disussion groups and I am frequenly entertained by the dumbest fucking takes in the world by doing so such as all the bitching and crying over how things are going woke and how they somehow think that their insular reactionary bubble clearly MUST represent the majority opinion even in the face of proof that WotC and D&D is doing better as a gaming brand than literally any other gaming IP in history with the sole exception of Pokemon... which WotC is also responsible for kickstarting.
Obvious troll is obvious.
I'm sure the "wizard college prom, hot mess, coffee shop, good-drow, bonus-less heritage, combat wheelchair, in castle Seattle with no slavery" crowd are mature vital fecund virile independent minded people who find the cultivation, formation, and maintenance of close intimate relationships to be very easy, notwithstanding the prevalence of sexual misconduct accusations and rather heavy promotion of safe-space player protection paperwork by the publisher.
How could it be otherwise? They have a youtube show.
Quote from: S'mon on January 22, 2022, 03:48:58 AM
Quote from: jhkim on January 21, 2022, 09:39:31 PM
The big question is - how does the 5e dropoff compare to other edition dropoffs?
5e actually has been holding up very well AFAICT - it has great 'legs', which seems to have been part of the (Mearls-led) plan 2012-14. While I don't think Crawford's recent messing around with 5e has helped sales, I doubt it has impacted sales much either. I don't think his more Woke recent material has sold particularly well, but I don't think that has harmed the overall bottom line very much yet either. While a grognard like me gets upset over the removal of racial attribute bonuses, I don't think that kind of thing has any impact on new players.
I do think that Woke makes everything dreary and that this ultimately has a repellent effect on the mass market. But 5e was not particularly Woke at inception, and has a lot of momentum. I think Crawford has helped initiate a very slow gradual decline, I don't think stuff like Strixhaven is selling very well, but I would not expect to see a big drop off for several years on current trajectory. If Crawford pushes Woke too hard then the 2024 re-release may not do as well as expected. But whether Hasbro will push a course correction even then, I don't know.
I do think that compared to a mass market corporation like Disney, a large proportion of WotC's customers are likely more accepting of Woke elements. But still, there are very few SJWs in real life, and people play D&D at the table to have fun, not to virtue signal. So it can certainly go too far even for WotC.
Damn. What a well written, level headed response.
I suppose as long as the content of the core books stays close to the original product offering; it's possible that the recent goofiness in current releases, won't impact the core sales too much? Perhaps I was wrong?
It will be interesting to see how much they tinker with the proven recipe, when the new core books are released in 2024.
Quote from: Jam The MF on January 21, 2022, 11:10:27 PM
Quote from: Mistwell on January 21, 2022, 10:21:58 PM
Quote from: Omega on January 21, 2022, 08:48:59 PM
Quote from: Mistwell on January 20, 2022, 09:54:25 PM
I mean what is so fucking hilarious about this thread is people who routinely claim, "Get Woke Go Broke" is a real thing are simultaneously trying to argue that WOTC - which has done INCREDIBLY well in recent years, far better than Hasbro itself - is also too woke and going broke because of it.
I don't even think you fuckers keep track of which positions you take anymore.
1: But are they doing as well now that they have started fucking with everything as they did on 5e's release?
No.
Yes. UNQUESTIONABLY yes. We know this, with certainty. It's doing WAY WAY WAY better than when 5e was released. We have solid quarterly reports on that, which are covered by FTC truth in statement reports. Their total D&D sales per year have gone WAY up over time. They JUST had their biggest year ever, and the year prior to that was also a biggest year ever to date.
That you think it's doing worse now than at the beginning of 5e just shows once again the people who post here have no fucking idea what's actually going on in the RPG world. It would be pretty fucking impossible to be under the belief it's doing worse now than at the beginning of 5e if you were doing anything other than living under a metaphorical RPG rock.
I also think the people who post here just don't even think about digital sales anymore. Which is ironic since for indie games digital sales are the gold standard and indie games are discussed a ton here. But when it comes to WOTC, I think that thought just goes right out of people's minds.
At the launch of D&D 5E; there were 3 core books, a 2 volume adventure, and the Starter Set to drive numbers. Many other adventure books have released in the numerous years since; plus 2 additional monster manuals, a handful of setting books, a handful of rules expansion books, a new boxed adventure for new players, multiple DM Screens, and more. Just looking at print sales alone, there is now an entire catalog of offerings on the market. I'm sure "total" book sales numbers might be higher right now, than they were at the first launch of 5E; but what about comparing just the sales numbers of the core 3 books over time? That's a better indicator of the growth of the player base.
The PHB, MM, and DMG sales numbers indicate the growth of the player base. At least the serious players, anyway.
No not total sales, just per-year sales. Per-year sales have been higher each year. Of course the sales of the three core books should go down over time - you'd literally have to more than double your total player base every year to have core book sales go up every year and that's impossible to do for that many years - you're saying they'd have to have exponential growth for 8 years to demonstrate success? What's not impossible is to increase your player base every year and sell more books to your existing player base every year - which is what they've done.
Quote from: S'mon on January 22, 2022, 03:48:58 AM
5e actually has been holding up very well AFAICT - it has great 'legs', which seems to have been part of the (Mearls-led) plan 2012-14. While I don't think Crawford's recent messing around with 5e has helped sales, I doubt it has impacted sales much either. I don't think his more Woke recent material has sold particularly well, but I don't think that has harmed the overall bottom line very much yet either. While a grognard like me gets upset over the removal of racial attribute bonuses, I don't think that kind of thing has any impact on new players.
I do think that Woke makes everything dreary and that this ultimately has a repellent effect on the mass market. But 5e was not particularly Woke at inception, and has a lot of momentum. I think Crawford has helped initiate a very slow gradual decline, I don't think stuff like Strixhaven is selling very well, but I would not expect to see a big drop off for several years on current trajectory. If Crawford pushes Woke too hard then the 2024 re-release may not do as well as expected. But whether Hasbro will push a course correction even then, I don't know.
I do think that compared to a mass market corporation like Disney, a large proportion of WotC's customers are likely more accepting of Woke elements. But still, there are very few SJWs in real life, and people play D&D at the table to have fun, not to virtue signal. So it can certainly go too far even for WotC.
This is correct.
IMHO 5e has not
quite hit its peak.
It took Dr. Who about 10 years from its
ratings peak to get to the state where nobody watches the show anymore. It took Marvel and DC comics a similar timeframe to put themselves in the gutter from their relative highs.
(This was gone over in past threads.)5e is in an interesting place in that its latest stuff has not sold as well as past material, and it is far enough in its edition cycle that a little bit of a decline is to be expected. Yet we know that the 50th is two years out and that will be a big deal for D&D.
5e will enjoy a bit of a bump before the decline resumes. And as the current Devs continue to slowly turn up the woke dial they will both hasten the decline, and IMHO; render themselves unable to properly service their core fanbase.
The interesting parallel to track right now is the Fate of WoW / Blizzard. WoW was the undisputed MMO king for years, but has recently been overtaken by the Final Fantasy MMO...
WoW is not as far along in its journey to ignominy as superhero comics and Dr. Who, but the parallels in company behavior between the D&D devs, and WoW devs are very interesting...
Quote from: Mistwell on January 20, 2022, 09:54:25 PM
...
I mean what is so fucking hilarious about this thread is people who routinely claim, "Get Woke Go Broke" is a real thing are simultaneously trying to argue that WOTC - which has done INCREDIBLY well in recent years, far better than Hasbro itself - is also too woke and going broke because of it.
I don't even think you fuckers keep track of which positions you take anymore.
Being a disingenuous Liar again...
You know full well that the trajectory of "get woke, go broke" is an
arc, not a sharp fall off a cliff, from our debates where you were taken to school.
I can post links to refresh your memory.
But I realize that this will be par for the course going forward, as having chronic selective amnesia, and willfully misrepresenting peoples positions are the only arrows you have left in your quiver...
Quote from: Jaeger on January 23, 2022, 07:51:46 PM
WoW is not as far along in its journey to ignominy as superhero comics and Dr. Who
Definitely agree. I'd put the inflexion point at 2018 (ca
Waterdeep: Dragon Heist) and the Woke WoTC hectoring has remained mild compared to the really hostile hectoring of Doctor Who or Marvel Comics. The latter two are full of stuff about the evils of straight white men, there's very little explicitly hostile material like that in the WoTC products. The bigger problem is more the way Woke is hostile to actual conflict - to adventure. To dangerous villains that can actually win. To taking players (or readers, or viewers) away from everyday life into a heightened reality. For Woke, everything is Current Year, always and forever. That's the stench that afflicts Marvel & (more recently) DC comics, that ruined Doctor Who even for liberal fans, and is now afflicting WoTC.
Quote from: S'mon on January 22, 2022, 03:38:29 AM
Quote from: SHARK on January 21, 2022, 07:05:08 PM
Greetings!
Yeah, Mistwell! That's right. Come to think of it--I can't think of anyone here who isn't married or has a girlfriend. Maybe a bare few don't. Everyone else though seems to be doing just fine with women.
"Incel". *Laughing* What a moron.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Well I'm divorced (yaay!), a father (with equal custody), and I ignored my ex girlfriend from 2019-2020 when she PM'd & tried to get back with me last week. Does that make me a VolCel? ;D
I have been married for more than 30 years, to my first wife. I have kids and grandkids. I'm currently employed, and I have been at my present job for more than 5 years now. Many of the critics who post, don't know what the hell they are talking about.
Quote from: Jam The MF on January 24, 2022, 05:31:58 AM
Quote from: S'mon on January 22, 2022, 03:38:29 AM
Quote from: SHARK on January 21, 2022, 07:05:08 PM
Greetings!
Yeah, Mistwell! That's right. Come to think of it--I can't think of anyone here who isn't married or has a girlfriend. Maybe a bare few don't. Everyone else though seems to be doing just fine with women.
"Incel". *Laughing* What a moron.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Well I'm divorced (yaay!), a father (with equal custody), and I ignored my ex girlfriend from 2019-2020 when she PM'd & tried to get back with me last week. Does that make me a VolCel? ;D
I have been married for more than 30 years, to my first wife. I have kids and grandkids. I'm currently employed, and I have been at my present job for more than 5 years now. Many of the critics who post, don't know what the hell they are talking about.
Actually, they know exactly what they are talking about. They are just unconstrained by facts. Their objective is to have their ideas win (note "their ideas" and not "the best ideas" or "those ideas most closely corresponding to reality"). Therefore, it doesn't matter if what they say about you, me, or Pundit is fair, accurate, or factual. If it associates us with negative things, no matter if real or not, then it is "good." That's who they are, and that's the tactics they have chosen.
Quote from: Jaeger on January 23, 2022, 07:51:46 PM
Quote from: S'mon on January 22, 2022, 03:48:58 AM
5e actually has been holding up very well AFAICT - it has great 'legs', which seems to have been part of the (Mearls-led) plan 2012-14. While I don't think Crawford's recent messing around with 5e has helped sales, I doubt it has impacted sales much either. I don't think his more Woke recent material has sold particularly well, but I don't think that has harmed the overall bottom line very much yet either. While a grognard like me gets upset over the removal of racial attribute bonuses, I don't think that kind of thing has any impact on new players.
I do think that Woke makes everything dreary and that this ultimately has a repellent effect on the mass market. But 5e was not particularly Woke at inception, and has a lot of momentum. I think Crawford has helped initiate a very slow gradual decline, I don't think stuff like Strixhaven is selling very well, but I would not expect to see a big drop off for several years on current trajectory. If Crawford pushes Woke too hard then the 2024 re-release may not do as well as expected. But whether Hasbro will push a course correction even then, I don't know.
I do think that compared to a mass market corporation like Disney, a large proportion of WotC's customers are likely more accepting of Woke elements. But still, there are very few SJWs in real life, and people play D&D at the table to have fun, not to virtue signal. So it can certainly go too far even for WotC.
This is correct.
IMHO 5e has not quite hit its peak.
It took Dr. Who about 10 years from its ratings peak to get to the state where nobody watches the show anymore. It took Marvel and DC comics a similar timeframe to put themselves in the gutter from their relative highs. (This was gone over in past threads.)
5e is in an interesting place in that its latest stuff has not sold as well as past material, and it is far enough in its edition cycle that a little bit of a decline is to be expected. Yet we know that the 50th is two years out and that will be a big deal for D&D.
5e will enjoy a bit of a bump before the decline resumes. And as the current Devs continue to slowly turn up the woke dial they will both hasten the decline, and IMHO; render themselves unable to properly service their core fanbase.
The interesting parallel to track right now is the Fate of WoW / Blizzard. WoW was the undisputed MMO king for years, but has recently been overtaken by the Final Fantasy MMO...
WoW is not as far along in its journey to ignominy as superhero comics and Dr. Who, but the parallels in company behavior between the D&D devs, and WoW devs are very interesting...
Quote from: Mistwell on January 20, 2022, 09:54:25 PM
...
I mean what is so fucking hilarious about this thread is people who routinely claim, "Get Woke Go Broke" is a real thing are simultaneously trying to argue that WOTC - which has done INCREDIBLY well in recent years, far better than Hasbro itself - is also too woke and going broke because of it.
I don't even think you fuckers keep track of which positions you take anymore.
Being a disingenuous Liar again...
You know full well that the trajectory of "get woke, go broke" is an arc, not a sharp fall off a cliff, from our debates where you were taken to school.
I can post links to refresh your memory.
But I realize that this will be par for the course going forward, as having chronic selective amnesia, and willfully misrepresenting peoples positions are the only arrows you have left in your quiver...
D&D sales increased by 33% (record breaking) for 2020 (https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/13/dungeons-dragons-had-its-biggest-year-despite-the-coronavirus.html), and yet their publications for 2020 were far more "woke" than prior years.You just keep fucking lying about how they're doing though. And when called on it you change the subject and then state the lie again when you think you can get away with it. You have NEVER supported the claim that their sales went down as their "woke" content went up. Ever.
Numbers are not out yet for 2021 but how much you want to bet 2021 was another big year for them? You won't though. Because it's the heart of your entire argument and you will do anything to defend your world view, including invent your own facts.
Mistwell: Your moves are weak.
Each meltdown screed is becoming more incoherent than the last.
Yet still I rise...
Quote from: Mistwell on January 24, 2022, 09:19:15 PM
...
D&D sales increased by 33% (record breaking) for 2020 (https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/13/dungeons-dragons-had-its-biggest-year-despite-the-coronavirus.html), and yet their publications for 2020 were far more "woke" than prior years. You just keep fucking lying about how they're doing though. And when called on it you change the subject and then state the lie again when you think you can get away with it. You have NEVER supported the claim that their sales went down as their "woke" content went up. Ever.
Please Quote the post where I made that exact claim..
Oh, wait, never mind; you can't. Because you're lying.
Please refresh your memory of my positions by reviewing these past slap-downs you received:
https://www.therpgsite.com/pen-paper-roleplaying-games-rpgs-discussion/dd-is-selling-great-why-not-sell-it-now/120/
https://www.therpgsite.com/pen-paper-roleplaying-games-rpgs-discussion/will-the-current-woke-environment-hasten-or-delay-a-wotc-commitment-to-6th-ed/60/
My position quoted from those threads:
Quote from: Jaegerhttps://www.therpgsite.com/pen-paper-roleplaying-games-rpgs-discussion/will-the-current-woke-environment-hasten-or-delay-a-wotc-commitment-to-6th-ed/msg1161563/#msg1161563
...
In 5e we are only now starting to see the heat on the lobster pot getting turned up.
Personally, I don't think we will really know how things will go down until we see what they will do for the 50th in 2024.
And the signs are there that the people currently in charge of WOTC are willing to walk the same path that Marvel and DC comics have.
Outside of post 4e layoffs, Hasbro has been rather hands-off when it comes to WOTC. And Hasbro has also shown a willingness to indulge woke pleadings, the release of Ms. Monopoly being a prime example.
Does having great sales now somehow make D&D immune to the future loss of market share due to alienated fans walking away as we have seen in other media when they have doubled down on the woke path?
« Last Edit: January 26, 2021, 11:28:28 AM by Jaeger »
Quote from: Jaeger
https://www.therpgsite.com/pen-paper-roleplaying-games-rpgs-discussion/will-the-current-woke-environment-hasten-or-delay-a-wotc-commitment-to-6th-ed/msg1161908/#msg1161908
...
I and others make the argument that enough signs show that WOTC will continue to ramp up the woke to the point they start to alienate fans and wind up in a similar situation to the comics divisions of Marvel and DC. ...
These are the positions I have stated on D&D and go-woke, go-broke.
You just got caught lying about, and willfully misrepresenting my position.
Again.Quote from: Mistwell on January 24, 2022, 09:19:15 PM
Numbers are not out yet for 2021 but how much you want to bet 2021 was another big year for them? You won't though. Because it's the heart of your entire argument and
Outright comedy.
The fact that you say this as a response to the post you quoted, where I said:
Quote from: JaegerIMHO 5e has not quite hit its peak.
It took Dr. Who about 10 years from its ratings peak to get to the state where nobody watches the show anymore. It took Marvel and DC comics a similar timeframe to put themselves in the gutter from their relative highs. (This was gone over in past threads.)
I am literally claiming
the opposite of what you are saying I am!
Your ability to even comprehend what you are reading is obviously compromised.
1: You Lied.
2: You Doubled Down
And then...
3: You Projected.
Quote from: Mistwell on January 24, 2022, 09:19:15 PM
...you will do anything to defend your world view, including invent your own facts.
In a single post you have successfully demonstrated to this forum the three laws of SJW's in action:
SJW's Always Lie.
SJW's Always Double Down.
SJW's Always Project.They should thank you for providing such a textbook example of predictable SJW behavior.
Quote from: Jaeger on January 25, 2022, 02:12:56 AM
Quote from: Mistwell on January 24, 2022, 09:19:15 PM
They should thank you for providing such a textbook example of predictable SJW behavior.
Mistwell isn't a SJW.
Quote from: Pat on January 25, 2022, 02:32:55 AM
Mistwell isn't a SJW.
At the very least he does a rather credible imitation of some of their more notable behaviors...
I know that I'm opening up a can of worms here, but do we know what percentage of WotC's D&D sales are coming from 5E and what percentage has been coming from the sale of their back catalog as PDFs?
Quote from: Jaeger on January 25, 2022, 03:48:59 AM
Quote from: Pat on January 25, 2022, 02:32:55 AM
Mistwell isn't a SJW.
At the very least he does a rather credible imitation of some of their more notable behaviors...
Do you like it when someone calls you alt-right, and when someone points out you're not, they backpedal and say you just do a rather credible imitation of some of their noteworthy behaviors?
Quote from: Pat on January 25, 2022, 09:37:59 AM
Quote from: Jaeger on January 25, 2022, 03:48:59 AM
Quote from: Pat on January 25, 2022, 02:32:55 AM
Mistwell isn't a SJW.
At the very least he does a rather credible imitation of some of their more notable behaviors...
Do you like it when someone calls you alt-right, and when someone points out you're not, they backpedal and say you just do a rather credible imitation of some of their noteworthy behaviors?
Feel free to compare Mistwell's ranting in this thread to the deranged screeds he's leveled at you in the Covid threads, Pat.
Then tell us he's not an SJW, or at least a reasonable facsimile.
Quote from: Pat on January 25, 2022, 09:37:59 AM
Quote from: Jaeger on January 25, 2022, 03:48:59 AM
Quote from: Pat on January 25, 2022, 02:32:55 AM
Mistwell isn't a SJW.
At the very least he does a rather credible imitation of some of their more notable behaviors...
Do you like it when someone calls you alt-right, and when someone points out you're not, they backpedal and say you just do a rather credible imitation of some of their noteworthy behaviors?
My argument isn't with you, so I soft-pedaled my response. Obviously I made an error in doing so. My Bad.
(And if we are now trying to score rhetorical points off of one another; do note that I never outright called him an SJW - I simply said he provided a textbook case of SJW behavior...) ;)
To be Clear.
Re: Mistwell. My only interaction with him is largely through this forum, so it is all I have to make a judgment on.
Many of his talking points, and the way he responds are straight out of the SJW playbook. Especially the way he openly lies and misrepresents the positions of the people he is arguing against. And I am far from the only one to note his disingenuous responses...
Whatever he may say about not agreeing with certain SJW behaviors; he is most certainly in lock-step as a fellow traveler on others.
IMHO, the oft attributed quote to Lenin of:
"The useful idiot." describes much of what he does to a
'T'...
So SJW, not SJW, whatever. Call him whatever you want.
I'll continue to call him out on his disingenuous BS towards me the same way I always have.
Quote from: Mistwell on January 20, 2022, 09:51:58 PM
Quote from: Omega on January 19, 2022, 06:40:30 PM
Quote from: THE_Leopold on January 19, 2022, 09:05:26 AM
This pattern is similar to what Disney is doing with Marvel and Marvel Comics. Comics are utter trash but the IP and licensing profits are where the money is so Disney is just fine with letting SJW brigade run comics into the ground as long as the movies, tv shows, and other forms of media continue to generate net positive cash flow.
Then they ran it into the dirt and sales are starting to drop and reviews are starting to be increasingly less flattering.
They literally just had the second biggest movie ever, and that in the midst of an epic meltdown in that movie industry otherwise. I mean, I know people love to bloviant bullshit here but you're so astronomically full of shit on this topic.
Sony just had the second biggest movie ever. Don't be fooled by their association with Marvel: it is Sony who dictates what happens in the Spiderverse. See also Venom (I'm baffled by the success of the second movie, BTW. I like Tom Hardy, but it was a waste of Woody Harrelson and the plot was nonexistent).
I don't know what is happening to Sony, but they released the unwoke Ghostbusters: Afterlife, which was fine even if it was a copy of the original; most importantly, it obliterated the terrible 2016 movie from the continuity. They had a big success with the unwoke Venom 1 & 2. They are a key contributor to the gigantor success of the unwoke Spiderman series with Tom Holland.
Also, BBC lost the rights to Doctor Who (!) They now belong to the returning showrunner Russel T. Davies's company, which Davies promptly sold to... Sony. First rumor out of the gate: David Tennant could return as the Doctor (first return ever) for a period, to help to bridge the passage from woke-Who to normality.
Meanwhile, Disney's Marvel is dire. Wandavision started wonderfully and then sabotaged itself. Loki was terrible and a waste of Tom Hiddleston. Hawkeye was the usual bait-and-switch where you pimp a male lead for a female-centric story (see also the recent He Man). Shang-chi did fine (I didn't like it but it was not terrible). The uber-woke Eternals was a boring dumpster fire that fiascoed hard (I actually think that watching a real dumpster fire would have been more fun). And Disney even managed to do a mess with Black Widow - something that I didn't even know was possible - ending up losing half a billion on that movie alone (the only thing I remember from BW was that it had a really great prologue, with me writing in my head, in real time, a better story starting from that prologue alone).
So, no, Disney's MCU is flatlining and Disney+ is creaking. Interestingly enough, the New Year message from their CEO - about their moving forward strategy - announced that the public is their first investor or such, and so they must first keep in mind the happiness of the public. One can only wonder what their strategy was before...
Quote from: Reckall on January 25, 2022, 01:31:43 PM
I don't know what is happening to Sony, but they released the unwoke Ghostbusters: Afterlife, which was fine even if it was a copy of the original; most importantly, it obliterated the terrible 2016 movie from the continuity. They had a big success with the unwoke Venom 1 & 2. They are a key contributor to the gigantor success of the unwoke Spiderman series with Tom Holland.
Quote from: Reckall on January 25, 2022, 01:31:43 PM
So, no, Disney's MCU is flatlining and Disney+ is creaking. Interestingly enough, the New Year message from their CEO - about their moving forward strategy - announced that the public is their first investor or such, and so they must first keep in mind the happiness of the public. One can only wonder what their strategy was before...
I'd say the recent Sony Spider-Man movies have been roughly as woke or un-woke as the Marvel-only MCU movies. Sony's "Into the Spider-verse" starred a black Spider-Man and had Spider-Gwen and a female Doc Ock -- and the live-action films cast non-white actors Zendaya as MJ, Jacob Batoyon as Ned, and Tony Revolori as Flash. I haven't seen "No Way Home" yet, but the first two Tom Holland movies are seamless in continuity with the rest of the MCU films. I enjoyed them - they're in the top quarter of the MCU for me.
Monetarily, Disney stock has trended down recently - but that's after record-breaking profits and successes in recent years. It's unrealistic to expect that they continue the success of Endgame year over year, particularly in the pandemic era. In the U.S. box office, the top six films of 2021 were:
$573M Spider-Man: No Way Home
$225M Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings
$213M Venom: Let There Be Carnage
$184M Black Widow
$173M F9: The Fast Saga
$165M Eternals
So Marvel-only had 3 of the top 6, plus they are involved in Spider-Man. In streaming, Disney Plus just launched at the end of 2019, and it already has 120 million subscribers. I haven't been impressed by their mini-series, but it's hard to call it a financial failure.
Quote from: jhkim on January 25, 2022, 04:47:18 PM
Quote from: Reckall on January 25, 2022, 01:31:43 PM
I don't know what is happening to Sony, but they released the unwoke Ghostbusters: Afterlife, which was fine even if it was a copy of the original; most importantly, it obliterated the terrible 2016 movie from the continuity. They had a big success with the unwoke Venom 1 & 2. They are a key contributor to the gigantor success of the unwoke Spiderman series with Tom Holland.
Quote from: Reckall on January 25, 2022, 01:31:43 PM
So, no, Disney's MCU is flatlining and Disney+ is creaking. Interestingly enough, the New Year message from their CEO - about their moving forward strategy - announced that the public is their first investor or such, and so they must first keep in mind the happiness of the public. One can only wonder what their strategy was before...
I'd say the recent Sony Spider-Man movies have been roughly as woke or un-woke as the Marvel-only MCU movies. Sony's "Into the Spider-verse" starred a black Spider-Man and had Spider-Gwen and a female Doc Ock -- and the live-action films cast non-white actors Zendaya as MJ, Jacob Batoyon as Ned, and Tony Revolori as Flash. I haven't seen "No Way Home" yet, but the first two Tom Holland movies are seamless in continuity with the rest of the MCU films. I enjoyed them - they're in the top quarter of the MCU for me.
Monetarily, Disney stock has trended down recently - but that's after record-breaking profits and successes in recent years. It's unrealistic to expect that they continue the success of Endgame year over year, particularly in the pandemic era. In the U.S. box office, the top six films of 2021 were:
$573M Spider-Man: No Way Home
$225M Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings
$213M Venom: Let There Be Carnage
$184M Black Widow
$173M F9: The Fast Saga
$165M Eternals
So Marvel-only had 3 of the top 6, plus they are involved in Spider-Man. In streaming, Disney Plus just launched at the end of 2019, and it already has 120 million subscribers. I haven't been impressed by their mini-series, but it's hard to call it a financial failure.
Of those top 6 which ones lost money? Let me give you a hint: They were made by Disney.
As fot the Tom Holland movies: I fucking hate them, I'm done with the gender bending/race swaping, fuck them.
Into the Spiderverse, tokenized Spider-Man... Hard Pass.
Is Disney about to fill for bankrupcy?
NOPEAre the American Comics being kept alive by their parent corporations due to low sales?
YESIs Disney/WB loosing money from merchandize? Nope, not yet, they don't produce the merchandize, they charge others for the privilege of producing it.
Will they have to lower the price of the merchandize licenses? Probably, if they manage to alienate enough customers.
Is WotC costing Hasbro money? Yes, but not enough for they to care and now with the new CEO being a woketard from WotC they will probably never care unless stock owners force them to.
Remember every alienated customer is sales you loose, plus his friends if they follow his advice. One happy customer recomends you with 3 people, and unhappy one with 10. Those are lost sales. But again, when you have megadollar megacorporations behind you you have the luxury to not care for a while, maybe forever if you constrain yourself and manage to not alienate that many customers.
Will WotC course correct? I doubt it and honestly I hope they don't.
BUT, IF Disney does course correct as some seem to think is to be expected due to recent discourses well all bets are off. IF Disney course corrects then I expect ALL entertainment companies to follow suit.
If all of Hasboro now goes to promoting sodomy prom, wtf do I care? I checked out of WOTC some time ago, and if pushing gay prom rolls up their sales, good for them.
Quote from: Ghostmaker on January 25, 2022, 10:47:59 AM
Quote from: Pat on January 25, 2022, 09:37:59 AM
Quote from: Jaeger on January 25, 2022, 03:48:59 AM
Quote from: Pat on January 25, 2022, 02:32:55 AM
Mistwell isn't a SJW.
At the very least he does a rather credible imitation of some of their more notable behaviors...
Do you like it when someone calls you alt-right, and when someone points out you're not, they backpedal and say you just do a rather credible imitation of some of their noteworthy behaviors?
Feel free to compare Mistwell's ranting in this thread to the deranged screeds he's leveled at you in the Covid threads, Pat.
Then tell us he's not an SJW, or at least a reasonable facsimile.
You know what SJW warriors do? They call everyone who disagrees with them alt-right, or Nazis, or fascists. They assign them all the negative traits of whoever they consider to be their worst enemy.
Jaeger's doing the same thing, except using SJWs as the universal enemy.
I obviously am not a fan of Mistwell, who seems to have become unhinged lately, and has been targeting me. But painting everyone who disagrees with you as a fascist or a SJW doesn't help. Criticize people's arguments, or even their behavior. But don't put on the partisan blinders.
Quote from: Pat on January 25, 2022, 05:23:08 PM
Quote from: Ghostmaker on January 25, 2022, 10:47:59 AM
Quote from: Pat on January 25, 2022, 09:37:59 AM
Quote from: Jaeger on January 25, 2022, 03:48:59 AM
Quote from: Pat on January 25, 2022, 02:32:55 AM
Mistwell isn't a SJW.
At the very least he does a rather credible imitation of some of their more notable behaviors...
Do you like it when someone calls you alt-right, and when someone points out you're not, they backpedal and say you just do a rather credible imitation of some of their noteworthy behaviors?
Feel free to compare Mistwell's ranting in this thread to the deranged screeds he's leveled at you in the Covid threads, Pat.
Then tell us he's not an SJW, or at least a reasonable facsimile.
You know what SJW warriors do? They call everyone who disagrees with them alt-right, or Nazis, or fascists. They assign them all the negative traits of whoever they consider to be their worst enemy.
Jaeger's doing the same thing, except using SJWs as the universal enemy.
I obviously am not a fan of Mistwell, who seems to have become unhinged lately, and has been targeting me. But painting everyone who disagrees with you as a fascist or a SJW doesn't help. Criticize people's arguments, or even their behavior. But don't put on the partisan blinders.
It's great that you're trying to offer him the benefit of the doubt. I actually admire you for that.
I think you're wrong, but I can't fault someone for sticking on principles.
Quote from: jhkim on January 25, 2022, 04:47:18 PM
I haven't seen "No Way Home" yet
You should see it, it's great! Definitely celebrates the past, celebrates heroism - straight white male heroism in this instance, but that's ok right? ;D Even MJ, who previously seemed like an alien from Third Rock from the Sun, acts like a normal decent human being this time around.
Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 25, 2022, 05:12:26 PM
As fot the Tom Holland movies: I fucking hate them, I'm done with the gender bending/race swaping, fuck them.
Into the Spiderverse, tokenized Spider-Man... Hard Pass.
In my book Into the Spiderverse was great. Wokeness has nothing to do with simple race/gender swapping, as these can be interesting variations to a trope. That movie explored the idea that there are infinite realities and each reality can express the concept of Spiderman in a different way. It was a rush, with great pacing and something new every minute.
I'm curious to see Denzel Washington's Macbeth even if a Scottish King was hardly black, because I'm interested in the actor's approach to the subject (the trailer looks really interesting). Fans of Doctor Who clamored for a female Doctor for decades. What destroyed it was not the gender swapping but how it launched a campaign of gender/identity politics that never belonged to Doctor Who (along with some truly dire writing).
To be clear, I also hated the gender/race swapping in Dune, Foundation, The Wheel of Time... The last two were absolute trash. I also have very bad feelings about Amazon's Lord of the Rings (where "Maori Hobbits" have already be rumbled about).
Quote from: S'mon on January 26, 2022, 02:28:51 AM
Quote from: jhkim on January 25, 2022, 04:47:18 PM
I haven't seen "No Way Home" yet
You should see it, it's great! Definitely celebrates the past, celebrates heroism - straight white male heroism in this instance, but that's ok right? ;D Even MJ, who previously seemed like an alien from Third Rock from the Sun, acts like a normal decent human being this time around.
Thanks. I intend to see it - I just don't usually see any movie right when it comes out. I'll probably see it next week in the theaters. (With television, I'll often wait years until after a series is over before I start watching it.)
Quote from: Reckall on January 26, 2022, 05:00:11 AM
Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 25, 2022, 05:12:26 PM
As fot the Tom Holland movies: I fucking hate them, I'm done with the gender bending/race swaping, fuck them.
Into the Spiderverse, tokenized Spider-Man... Hard Pass.
In my book Into the Spiderverse was great. Wokeness has nothing to do with simple race/gender swapping, as these can be interesting variations to a trope. That movie explored the idea that there are infinite realities and each reality can express the concept of Spiderman in a different way. It was a rush, with great pacing and something new every minute.
I'm curious to see Denzel Washington's Macbeth even if a Scottish King was hardly black, because I'm interested in the actor's approach to the subject (the trailer looks really interesting). Fans of Doctor Who clamored for a female Doctor for decades. What destroyed it was not the gender swapping but how it launched a campaign of gender/identity politics that never belonged to Doctor Who (along with some truly dire writing).
To be clear, I also hated the gender/race swapping in Dune, Foundation, The Wheel of Time... The last two were absolute trash. I also have very bad feelings about Amazon's Lord of the Rings (where "Maori Hobbits" have already be rumbled about).
Amazon did know that Arda also includes equivalents of Africa, Asia, and Australia, right? Did they just not care to have characters from those places show up? Numenor is supposed to be the capital of an empire, so it would make sense they'd have embassies from those places and colonies in those places. It's an easy way to include characters from non-white races and cultures, including Maori, and tie them into politics.
(It's strange. They didn't racebend
Shadow & Bone very much, and when they did they typically noted it. The heroine is mixed race and suffers from racism... the execution was not great and wrecked the escapism.)
The problem with the eastern and southern kingdoms is that canonically they worshiped Morgoth and that will not go over well in today's market. It's one of the few things I'm okay with adaptations being flexible with. You could make a series of movies, or tv shows, about the Blue Wizards helping the people of the true faith overthrow the wicked Morgoth cult.
Quote from: S'mon on January 22, 2022, 03:48:58 AM
5e actually has been holding up very well AFAICT - it has great 'legs', which seems to have been part of the (Mearls-led) plan 2012-14. While I don't think Crawford's recent messing around with 5e has helped sales, I doubt it has impacted sales much either. I don't think his more Woke recent material has sold particularly well, but I don't think that has harmed the overall bottom line very much yet either.
Crawfords been messing with 5e since practically the get-go. If you ask him and Mearls a question about the rules. Odds are very high that Crawford will answer the near diametric opposite of Mearls. This was apparent early on in 5es release. After that he seemed to settle down for a while, with brief flare-ups. Then recently hes been pushing more and more stuff thats impacting the bottom line one way or another.
Why? Who knows. Some of his answers remind me a bit of that woman who for a time ran the Q&A section of Dragon and deliberately gave bad answers because she wanted to discourage kids staying inside playing RPGs when they should be outside.
Quote from: Omega on January 26, 2022, 02:44:57 PM
Quote from: S'mon on January 22, 2022, 03:48:58 AM
5e actually has been holding up very well AFAICT - it has great 'legs', which seems to have been part of the (Mearls-led) plan 2012-14. While I don't think Crawford's recent messing around with 5e has helped sales, I doubt it has impacted sales much either. I don't think his more Woke recent material has sold particularly well, but I don't think that has harmed the overall bottom line very much yet either.
Crawfords been messing with 5e since practically the get-go. If you ask him and Mearls a question about the rules. Odds are very high that Crawford will answer the near diametric opposite of Mearls. This was apparent early on in 5es release. After that he seemed to settle down for a while, with brief flare-ups. Then recently hes been pushing more and more stuff thats impacting the bottom line one way or another.
Why? Who knows. Some of his answers remind me a bit of that woman who for a time ran the Q&A section of Dragon and deliberately gave bad answers because she wanted to discourage kids staying inside playing RPGs when they should be outside.
I don't know if this has anything to do with Wokeness, but his Sage/Twitter answers do often seem to make special effort to be bad/perverse.
Quote from: S'mon on January 22, 2022, 03:51:56 AM
It used to be true that MTG dominated D&D, but that has not been true for several years, as Mistwell will no doubt explain with much gloating. ;D
MTG sales have been slowly declining since the CCG bubble burst. Its not a huge decline, but I've noticed their section in stores is slowly shrinking. And for a time their Pokemon CCG was outselling MTG.
Quote from: S'mon on January 26, 2022, 02:59:45 PM
I don't know if this has anything to do with Wokeness, but his Sage/Twitter answers do often seem to make special effort to be bad/perverse.
This started long before any SJW hints and is very noticeable sometimes. And it is very obviously not because of his proclaimed different playing style.
Someone had a list of some of the more WTF answers but cant find it now. But the "Only one hour of continuous combat can break a long rest" still stands out as poster child for something being seriously the fuck wrong.
Quote from: Omega on January 26, 2022, 03:08:26 PM
Quote from: S'mon on January 26, 2022, 02:59:45 PM
I don't know if this has anything to do with Wokeness, but his Sage/Twitter answers do often seem to make special effort to be bad/perverse.
This started long before any SJW hints and is very noticeable sometimes. And it is very obviously not because of his proclaimed different playing style.
Someone had a list of some of the more WTF answers but cant find it now. But the "Only one hour of continuous combat can break a long rest" still stands out as poster child for something being seriously the fuck wrong.
Does the average dungeon even contain an hour of total combat encounters? In my experience, assuming 1 turn is about 6 seconds, the average combat encounter lasts about 30 seconds. That's 120 combat encounters per hour. It's a "technically" valid reading of the rules, and to be fair any combination of different strenuous activities would count against the hour, but it'd be absurd for him to not at least advise against doing it that way, since he's supposed to be offering sage advice. It's kinda in the name.
Quote from: Innocent Smith on January 27, 2022, 07:31:29 AM
Quote from: Omega on January 26, 2022, 03:08:26 PM
Quote from: S'mon on January 26, 2022, 02:59:45 PM
I don't know if this has anything to do with Wokeness, but his Sage/Twitter answers do often seem to make special effort to be bad/perverse.
This started long before any SJW hints and is very noticeable sometimes. And it is very obviously not because of his proclaimed different playing style.
Someone had a list of some of the more WTF answers but cant find it now. But the "Only one hour of continuous combat can break a long rest" still stands out as poster child for something being seriously the fuck wrong.
Does the average dungeon even contain an hour of total combat encounters? In my experience, assuming 1 turn is about 6 seconds, the average combat encounter lasts about 30 seconds. That's 120 combat encounters per hour. It's a "technically" valid reading of the rules, and to be fair any combination of different strenuous activities would count against the hour, but it'd be absurd for him to not at least advise against doing it that way, since he's supposed to be offering sage advice. It's kinda in the name.
Depends on the dungeon. I know when I ran Caverns of Quasqueton it took multiple days for the party to clear it to their satisfaction.
Admittedly, this also included salvaging as much of the furnishings as possible to sell off, and plotting to murder the architect.
Quote from: Reckall on January 26, 2022, 05:00:11 AM
Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 25, 2022, 05:12:26 PM
Into the Spiderverse, tokenized Spider-Man... Hard Pass.
In my book Into the Spiderverse was great.
Not often I agree with Reckall, so worth noting!
Just because Into the Spiderverse has a black spiderman doesn't make it tokenized. The theme wasn't about race at all that I could make out. The movie kind of gets
actual diversity right without explicitly making any such claim: it's about entirely different
universes. There's a Mecha-spiderman too, and a Toon spiderman. And yes, Peter Parker is in it.
Quote from: S'mon on January 26, 2022, 02:59:45 PM
Quote from: Omega on January 26, 2022, 02:44:57 PM
Quote from: S'mon on January 22, 2022, 03:48:58 AM
5e actually has been holding up very well AFAICT - it has great 'legs', which seems to have been part of the (Mearls-led) plan 2012-14. While I don't think Crawford's recent messing around with 5e has helped sales, I doubt it has impacted sales much either. I don't think his more Woke recent material has sold particularly well, but I don't think that has harmed the overall bottom line very much yet either.
Crawfords been messing with 5e since practically the get-go. If you ask him and Mearls a question about the rules. Odds are very high that Crawford will answer the near diametric opposite of Mearls. This was apparent early on in 5es release. After that he seemed to settle down for a while, with brief flare-ups. Then recently hes been pushing more and more stuff thats impacting the bottom line one way or another.
Why? Who knows. Some of his answers remind me a bit of that woman who for a time ran the Q&A section of Dragon and deliberately gave bad answers because she wanted to discourage kids staying inside playing RPGs when they should be outside.
I don't know if this has anything to do with Wokeness, but his Sage/Twitter answers do often seem to make special effort to be bad/perverse.
He's a subversive in the classical mold with a grievance against wider society. If he wasn't in DnD he would be a shrink pushing transgender ideology.
Quote from: Zalman on January 27, 2022, 08:51:44 AM
Quote from: Reckall on January 26, 2022, 05:00:11 AM
Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 25, 2022, 05:12:26 PM
Into the Spiderverse, tokenized Spider-Man... Hard Pass.
In my book Into the Spiderverse was great.
Not often I agree with Reckall, so worth noting!
Just because Into the Spiderverse has a black spiderman doesn't make it tokenized. The theme wasn't about race at all that I could make out. The movie kind of gets actual diversity right without explicitly making any such claim: it's about entirely different universes. There's a Mecha-spiderman too, and a Toon spiderman. And yes, Peter Parker is in it.
Spider-Ham was (and should remain) a joke.
Just because you liked it doesn't make it not a tokenized character. Do you know the definition of a tokenized character?
Take an established character and change it's sex/race/sexuality and call it a different character. Search Young Rippa in youtube, he has great videos talking about tokenization.
Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 27, 2022, 06:11:22 PM
Spider-Ham was (and should remain) a joke.
Just because you liked it doesn't make it not a tokenized character. Do you know the definition of a tokenized character?
Peter Porker was great!
Finally the cartoon pigs get representation.
Quote from: Pat on January 25, 2022, 05:23:08 PM
You know what SJW warriors do? They call everyone who disagrees with them alt-right, or Nazis, or fascists. They assign them all the negative traits of whoever they consider to be their worst enemy.
Jaeger's doing the same thing, except using SJWs as the universal enemy.
...
Except I'm not.
I have had debates and disagreements with others on this forum - who's opinions were far more liberal in stance than mine. Some of which I consider to be full of critical theory nonsense.
Predictably, neither convinced the other of anything.
Yet somehow we managed to disagree with each other and go our separate ways in peace.
So you are painting with a bit of a broad brush here...
to bring things back on track:
Quote from: jeff37923 on January 25, 2022, 07:54:14 AM
I know that I'm opening up a can of worms here, but do we know what percentage of WotC's D&D sales are coming from 5E and what percentage has been coming from the sale of their back catalog as PDFs?
It's about 2:1.
Magic makes a little more than twice as much as D&D last time I looked. (2020 numbers I think...)
IMHO the big indicator for the direction of WOTC & specifically D&D; is who are they are going to replace Chris Cocks with?
Will it be some one from the MTG side or D&D side of WOTC?
Quote from: Shasarak on January 27, 2022, 07:08:52 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 27, 2022, 06:11:22 PM
Spider-Ham was (and should remain) a joke.
Just because you liked it doesn't make it not a tokenized character. Do you know the definition of a tokenized character?
Peter Porker was great!
Finally the cartoon pigs get representation.
It was a great joke. For anthropomorphic animals as superheroes DC did it first and did it better.
Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 27, 2022, 07:58:34 PM
Quote from: Shasarak on January 27, 2022, 07:08:52 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 27, 2022, 06:11:22 PM
Spider-Ham was (and should remain) a joke.
Just because you liked it doesn't make it not a tokenized character. Do you know the definition of a tokenized character?
Peter Porker was great!
Finally the cartoon pigs get representation.
It was a great joke. For anthropomorphic animals as superheroes DC did it first and did it better.
Captain Carrot and the Amazing Zoo Crew FTW!
Quote from: RandyB on January 27, 2022, 08:52:52 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 27, 2022, 07:58:34 PM
Quote from: Shasarak on January 27, 2022, 07:08:52 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 27, 2022, 06:11:22 PM
Spider-Ham was (and should remain) a joke.
Just because you liked it doesn't make it not a tokenized character. Do you know the definition of a tokenized character?
Peter Porker was great!
Finally the cartoon pigs get representation.
It was a great joke. For anthropomorphic animals as superheroes DC did it first and did it better.
Captain Carrot and the Amazing Zoo Crew FTW!
Damn right!
Quote from: Ghostmaker on January 27, 2022, 07:56:15 AM
Quote from: Innocent Smith on January 27, 2022, 07:31:29 AM
Quote from: Omega on January 26, 2022, 03:08:26 PM
Quote from: S'mon on January 26, 2022, 02:59:45 PM
I don't know if this has anything to do with Wokeness, but his Sage/Twitter answers do often seem to make special effort to be bad/perverse.
This started long before any SJW hints and is very noticeable sometimes. And it is very obviously not because of his proclaimed different playing style.
Someone had a list of some of the more WTF answers but cant find it now. But the "Only one hour of continuous combat can break a long rest" still stands out as poster child for something being seriously the fuck wrong.
Does the average dungeon even contain an hour of total combat encounters? In my experience, assuming 1 turn is about 6 seconds, the average combat encounter lasts about 30 seconds. That's 120 combat encounters per hour. It's a "technically" valid reading of the rules, and to be fair any combination of different strenuous activities would count against the hour, but it'd be absurd for him to not at least advise against doing it that way, since he's supposed to be offering sage advice. It's kinda in the name.
Depends on the dungeon. I know when I ran Caverns of Quasqueton it took multiple days for the party to clear it to their satisfaction.
Admittedly, this also included salvaging as much of the furnishings as possible to sell off, and plotting to murder the architect.
No, in this case he meant specifically if a long rest was in action then there was no way of breaking it short of continuous non-stop combat for one whole hour.
Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 27, 2022, 07:58:34 PM
Quote from: Shasarak on January 27, 2022, 07:08:52 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 27, 2022, 06:11:22 PM
Spider-Ham was (and should remain) a joke.
Just because you liked it doesn't make it not a tokenized character. Do you know the definition of a tokenized character?
Peter Porker was great!
Finally the cartoon pigs get representation.
It was a great joke. For anthropomorphic animals as superheroes DC did it first and did it better.
Its not anthropomorphics. Its good ol funny animals. And that goes way back to characters like Captain Marvel Bunny, yes thats a real thing, and the aforementioned Captain Carrot. DC oddly had alot of these over the years.
Marvel seemed to rarely venture into the funny animal realm in the mainstream comics till Spider Ham. But their sideline lines did to varying degrees.
Pretty sure someones done a write-up for some of these for both companies attendant RPGs.
Who knows what sort of botch WOTC would make of a superhero RPG now.
Off topic but speaking of adaptions...
I am still surprised that WOTC never hyped 5es versatility like they did with 3e. They seemed to be prepping for it early on. Then nada.
This is looking to be the first edition to lack an attendant Gamma World game. But considering the massive botch of the ones for 3 and 4e... Maybe its for the best.
Quote from: Omega on January 19, 2022, 06:40:30 PMThen they ran it into the dirt and sales are starting to drop and reviews are starting to be increasingly less flattering.
How long they can ride the IP train is right now iffy. And without the RPG t back it they lose a portion of their customer base and lose the main source of recognition.
David Stewart's "Phases of Corporate IP Ownership" handles this quite nicely.
Quote from: Omega on January 28, 2022, 02:37:05 AM
Marvel seemed to rarely venture into the funny animal realm in the mainstream comics till Spider Ham. But their sideline lines did to varying degrees.
Spider-Ham dates back to c. 1983/84, but was part of their STAR Comics imprint for younger readers, so he fits into the latter. :)
Anb "Not Brand Ecch!" which was Marvel satiring their own universe. It was like Marvel's own Mad Magazine poking fun at itself and DC.
Quote from: Armchair Gamer on January 28, 2022, 07:49:42 AM
Quote from: Omega on January 28, 2022, 02:37:05 AM
Marvel seemed to rarely venture into the funny animal realm in the mainstream comics till Spider Ham. But their sideline lines did to varying degrees.
Spider-Ham dates back to c. 1983/84, but was part of their STAR Comics imprint for younger readers, so he fits into the latter. :)
Both as it started as a Marvel comic in 83. I have the 1st issue still I believe. The STAR line came out in 85 or so.
Well now we have a new D&D cartoon. (with the serial numbers almost filed off...) A Critical Role "adult" cartoon...
I am surprised WOTC didnt have a hand in this. Then again it may be a WOTC end run around Solomon's blockade on D&D media. But am probably giving WOTC too much credit.
Quote from: Omega on January 28, 2022, 02:37:05 AM
Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 27, 2022, 07:58:34 PM
Quote from: Shasarak on January 27, 2022, 07:08:52 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 27, 2022, 06:11:22 PM
Spider-Ham was (and should remain) a joke.
Just because you liked it doesn't make it not a tokenized character. Do you know the definition of a tokenized character?
Peter Porker was great!
Finally the cartoon pigs get representation.
It was a great joke. For anthropomorphic animals as superheroes DC did it first and did it better.
Its not anthropomorphics. Its good ol funny animals. And that goes way back to characters like Captain Marvel Bunny, yes thats a real thing, and the aforementioned Captain Carrot. DC oddly had alot of these over the years.
Marvel seemed to rarely venture into the funny animal realm in the mainstream comics till Spider Ham. But their sideline lines did to varying degrees.
Pretty sure someones done a write-up for some of these for both companies attendant RPGs.
Who knows what sort of botch WOTC would make of a superhero RPG now.
You grow hair from your armpits and it can move, lengthen, etc, think Medusa from the inhumans but gross.
Expect D&D to offer multiple-play modes for the Anniversary Edition:
1. Storymode: undying PCs that vomit backstory sub-plot in a way that ignores dice rolls. This version might even be diceless like Amber. Story is EVERYTHING, yes?
2. Hardcore old-school game with rolled/array stats, 1 or 2 "race" (or whatever they call it) perks, character flaw (pick your poison), skills catalog, spell catalog, equipment catalog (because shopping is FUN!)
No Classes. Want to play a sword-wielding, armor-clad Wizard? Go for it. Why should Clerics have all the fun?
Alignment? Nope. Deconstructionism annihilates morality. People just do what they want. Right? You as GM introduce a setting with active deities and you get an atheist PC who ignores the gods.
Because, RAW, they can. Your Gods and their magic has no effect on this PC.
Are you ready to run games for players who dictate exactly how you run your game?
I just watch the sea around the game. The waves are getting ridiculous.
I'm brand new to this forum, but have run D&D games for 44 years, and I've watched D&D change over the course of those decades quite a lot, just as likely most of the folks here have. I like 5e, I think there is a great deal to recommend about it and they did a good job in simplifying play from 3.0s complexity but maintaining the D&D feel. I skipped 4.0 for many reasons and so wont comment on it. When the IP started making woke statements, adding in LGBT relationships and generally just appealing to the (worst iimho) parts of the culture I was disappointed, even decided for a time to stop giving money to the IP that I've supported for most all my life. I finally realized that it wasn't really the wokeness that was eating at me in truth as much as I despise that vacuous philosophy, rather I was becoming unhappy with the brand before that happened. The writing has simply been losing quality from supplement to supplement. I realize this is a very subjective statement, its just my opinion after all, but I realized that I could ignore the little woke additions to the text but when the overall quality of the product has devolved, it's no longer worth bothering. Strixhaven is one of the very worst examples of this, and I'm not here to dish on Hasbro, so I don't intend to get into reviewing the work, there are dozens of reviews online that talk about what I'm saying here, agree or disagree. I've actually started focusing on Kobold Press and our current campaign is in Midgard. They are another woke gaming company, but their stable of writers are solid and put out quality gaming material. I don't really care what your politics are, bad writing is simply bad writing woke or no, and that is where WoTC is going.
Quote from: Shasarak on January 27, 2022, 07:08:52 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 27, 2022, 06:11:22 PM
Spider-Ham was (and should remain) a joke.
Just because you liked it doesn't make it not a tokenized character. Do you know the definition of a tokenized character?
Peter Porker was great!
Finally the cartoon pigs get representation.
Spanky Ham was both stunning and brave.
Quote from: Theory of Games on January 29, 2022, 10:16:33 PM
No Classes. Want to play a sword-wielding, armor-clad Wizard? Go for it. Why should Clerics have all the fun?
Alignment? Nope. Deconstructionism annihilates morality. People just do what they want. Right? You as GM introduce a setting with active deities and you get an atheist PC who ignores the gods.
Because, RAW, they can. Your Gods and their magic has no effect on this PC.
1: This was actually a thing for BX and 2e D&D. BX had a Dragon article introducing a "create your own class/race" system that was actually not bad. 2e had in the core books a watered down and more convoluted version. And later Skills & Powers opened up options as well. Think the Complete Handbook for Wizards did too. If not there then there was at least one ckass kit that opened up the ability to wear leather or chain I believe. Not positive though. Been a few decades.
2&3: Oddly enough BECMI has this. Clerics in that serve a cause, and get their power from their belief in that cause. Not from gods.
Quote from: Jamesbeadle on January 31, 2022, 12:06:00 AMWhen the IP started making woke statements, adding in LGBT relationships and generally just appealing to the (worst iimho) parts of the culture I was disappointed, even decided for a time to stop giving money to the IP that I've supported for most all my life.
I finally realized that it wasn't really the wokeness that was eating at me in truth as much as I despise that vacuous philosophy, rather I was becoming unhappy with the brand before that happened. The writing has simply been losing quality from supplement to supplement. I realize this is a very subjective statement, its just my opinion after all, but I realized that I could ignore the little woke additions to the text but when the overall quality of the product has devolved, it's no longer worth bothering.
1: So far. Not the so far part... The LGBT bits have been surprisingly small to the point of practically being non-existent. Worse. They are always meaningless. By that I mean in every case so far the LGBT insertions have no impact on the adventure or even on the insertion itself as an agenda platform.
2: 5e's writing has been all over the place. Overall ok. But around the advent of Essentials things started a slow decline. Then around Candlekeep a sharper decline. But you could say that of TSR too. Their product and modules were all over the place. Especially during 2e as they began to struggle with internal problems after ousting Gygax.
Quote from: Omega on January 31, 2022, 02:42:00 AM
5e's writing has been all over the place. Overall ok. But around the advent of Essentials things started a slow decline. Then around Candlekeep a sharper decline. But you could say that of TSR too. Their product and modules were all over the place. Especially during 2e as they began to struggle with internal problems after ousting Gygax.
I agree that the writing is all over the place -- but I liked Candlekeep Mysteries more than the other adventures I'm familiar with - Lost Mine of Phandelver, Princes of the Apocalypse and Out of the Abyss. So I don't think I see the same pattern as you. I like the core rules, but I thought the initial adventures were mediocre at best.
On the rules front: I thought the Sword Coast Guide was decent, and Volo's Guide was OK, but Tasha's was terrible. Fizban's seems mediocre so far - but I haven't read it through yet. I do feel like the rules quality is decreasing, but that has been true for most games as they enter the "splat book" phase of releases.
Quote from: Omega on January 31, 2022, 02:29:16 AM
1: This was actually a thing for BX and 2e D&D. BX had a Dragon article introducing a "create your own class/race" system that was actually not bad. 2e had in the core books a watered down and more convoluted version. And later Skills & Powers opened up options as well. Think the Complete Handbook for Wizards did too. If not there then there was at least one ckass kit that opened up the ability to wear leather or chain I believe. Not positive though. Been a few decades.
The create your own class system in Dragon was badly broken. Among other things, it tried to argue that magic-users were underpowered and needed a boost.
Quote from: jhkim on January 31, 2022, 11:58:26 AM
On the rules front: I thought the Sword Coast Guide was decent, and Volo's Guide was OK, but Tasha's was terrible. Fizban's seems mediocre so far - but I haven't read it through yet. I do feel like the rules quality is decreasing, but that has been true for most games as they enter the "splat book" phase of releases.
I thought that the rules from the Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide were terrible, especially the cantrips (particularly
booming blade) that got recommended for every power build and the racial variants (like winged tiefling).
I watched Crawfords interview talking about the new Mordenkainen's book on Races. And aside from the SJW sensitivities about race which are stupid, I rationally can understand why he wants races to not have cooked in stat modifiers... He says for years he wanted players to not min-max (my words) about stats and the importance stats have on Class mechanics with the implication that some races are better than others which leaves a bad feeling in his tummy... (aww...)
HOWEVER...
the implications of these mechanics means simply that there are no real cultural implications about these races, or for any of the settings these races are supposed to be native to. This notion that "not everyone is the same" is fine - but the pretense that the mechanical reality that underpins what a race has as attributes as a baseline average is silly because it's relative to humans and he pretends that's not it.
So setting lore and context don't matter as long as racial sensitivities which they promote as important are assuaged. Well this is the new 5e D&D. Enjoy!
Quote from: jhkim on January 31, 2022, 11:58:26 AM
Quote from: Omega on January 31, 2022, 02:42:00 AM
5e's writing has been all over the place. Overall ok. But around the advent of Essentials things started a slow decline. Then around Candlekeep a sharper decline. But you could say that of TSR too. Their product and modules were all over the place. Especially during 2e as they began to struggle with internal problems after ousting Gygax.
I agree that the writing is all over the place -- but I liked Candlekeep Mysteries more than the other adventures I'm familiar with - Lost Mine of Phandelver, Princes of the Apocalypse and Out of the Abyss. So I don't think I see the same pattern as you. I like the core rules, but I thought the initial adventures were mediocre at best.
On the rules front: I thought the Sword Coast Guide was decent, and Volo's Guide was OK, but Tasha's was terrible. Fizban's seems mediocre so far - but I haven't read it through yet. I do feel like the rules quality is decreasing, but that has been true for most games as they enter the "splat book" phase of releases.
I have the Starter, Essentials, the Tyranny of Dragons campaign pair, Tomb of Annihilation, Descent into Avernus, Curse of Strahd, and Wyld beyond the Witchlight. A player has Saltmarsh and one other cant recall at the moment. Think one of the Underdark ones.
Of these I've read through or DMed Starter, Essentials, Tyranny, Tomb and Strahd. Havent gotten much into Descent or Wyld yet.
Also I am trying not to count any 3rd party official modules. But it is hard to tell sometimes what is and isnt. The two Tyranny books were outsourced to Kobold for example and at least two other books were from third party groups that I know of.
Quote from: Pat on January 31, 2022, 12:55:01 PM
Quote from: Omega on January 31, 2022, 02:29:16 AM
1: This was actually a thing for BX and 2e D&D. BX had a Dragon article introducing a "create your own class/race" system that was actually not bad. 2e had in the core books a watered down and more convoluted version. And later Skills & Powers opened up options as well. Think the Complete Handbook for Wizards did too. If not there then there was at least one ckass kit that opened up the ability to wear leather or chain I believe. Not positive though. Been a few decades.
The create your own class system in Dragon was badly broken. Among other things, it tried to argue that magic-users were underpowered and needed a boost.
er? Where? I glanced through it and saw no such claims of MUs being underpowered. There is a extra spell progression table that gives a few more spells but no mention of why other than the option for more at a cost? More likely what we are seeing is the authors attempt to combine the clerics and MU's progressions somehow.
In X a MU will have a level 11 spread as follows. 4 3 3 3 2 1
While the VIa from Dragon has a spread of thus. 4 4 3 3 3 2
And in comparison the O, AD&D and 2e has this. 4 4 4 3 3 -
3e has a sort of mix of O and BX in an odd sort. 4 4 4 3 2 1
4e is its own thing.
And 5e bemusingly enough goes back to BX with. 4 3 3 3 2 1
Rather interesting the permutations just this alone has undergone.
Quote from: Omega on January 31, 2022, 07:18:52 PM
Quote from: Pat on January 31, 2022, 12:55:01 PM
Quote from: Omega on January 31, 2022, 02:29:16 AM
1: This was actually a thing for BX and 2e D&D. BX had a Dragon article introducing a "create your own class/race" system that was actually not bad. 2e had in the core books a watered down and more convoluted version. And later Skills & Powers opened up options as well. Think the Complete Handbook for Wizards did too. If not there then there was at least one ckass kit that opened up the ability to wear leather or chain I believe. Not positive though. Been a few decades.
The create your own class system in Dragon was badly broken. Among other things, it tried to argue that magic-users were underpowered and needed a boost.
er? Where? I glanced through it and saw no such claims of MUs being underpowered.
Look at the examples in the back, where they recreate the four classes. Their replica of the cleric takes 2,160 XP to reach level 2 (instead of 1,500 XP), while their magic-user takes 1,840 XP (instead of 2,500 XP). When you break up all the powers and try to assign them each an XP total that can be added up linearly to get the XP needed to advance, and then have one class who is poor at everything (with mediocre saves, poor attacks, poor attack progressions, poor HD, poor armor, poor weapons) except their primary shtick (magic), then either that shtick costs an obscene amount and is priced out of existence unless you have a class that really stacks on the negatives, or they have to pretend the magic-user is weak. Conversely, classes that are second best at everything but not particularly good at anything cost a lot.
More generally, the simple additive XP solution doesn't work when XP requirements follow a rough geometric progression (doubling each level, though 1e violates that more than B/X).
Quote from: Pat on January 31, 2022, 07:39:22 PM
Quote from: Omega on January 31, 2022, 07:18:52 PM
Quote from: Pat on January 31, 2022, 12:55:01 PM
Quote from: Omega on January 31, 2022, 02:29:16 AM
1: This was actually a thing for BX and 2e D&D. BX had a Dragon article introducing a "create your own class/race" system that was actually not bad. 2e had in the core books a watered down and more convoluted version. And later Skills & Powers opened up options as well. Think the Complete Handbook for Wizards did too. If not there then there was at least one ckass kit that opened up the ability to wear leather or chain I believe. Not positive though. Been a few decades.
The create your own class system in Dragon was badly broken. Among other things, it tried to argue that magic-users were underpowered and needed a boost.
er? Where? I glanced through it and saw no such claims of MUs being underpowered.
Look at the examples in the back, where they recreate the four classes. Their replica of the cleric takes 2,160 XP to reach level 2 (instead of 1,500 XP), while their magic-user takes 1,840 XP (instead of 2,500 XP). When you break up all the powers and try to assign them each an XP total that can be added up linearly to get the XP needed to advance, and then have one class who is poor at everything (with mediocre saves, poor attacks, poor attack progressions, poor HD, poor armor, poor weapons) except their primary shtick (magic), then either that shtick costs an obscene amount and is priced out of existence unless you have a class that really stacks on the negatives, or they have to pretend the magic-user is weak. Conversely, classes that are second best at everything but not particularly good at anything cost a lot.
More generally, the simple additive XP solution doesn't work when XP requirements follow a rough geometric progression (doubling each level, though 1e violates that more than B/X).
White lies published a build your own class suplement, it's free and their math works for the White Box FMAG based games.
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/167842/White-Lies--Admin-Toolkit-Class-Creation-Guide (https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/167842/White-Lies--Admin-Toolkit-Class-Creation-Guide)
Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 31, 2022, 07:46:33 PM
White lies published a build your own class suplement, it's free and their math works for the White Box FMAG based games.
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/167842/White-Lies--Admin-Toolkit-Class-Creation-Guide (https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/167842/White-Lies--Admin-Toolkit-Class-Creation-Guide)
What approach do they use?
Quote from: Pat on January 31, 2022, 07:55:10 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 31, 2022, 07:46:33 PM
White lies published a build your own class suplement, it's free and their math works for the White Box FMAG based games.
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/167842/White-Lies--Admin-Toolkit-Class-Creation-Guide (https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/167842/White-Lies--Admin-Toolkit-Class-Creation-Guide)
What approach do they use?
HD, Saves, Weapon training, Armor Training, Skill training, Special Abilities & BAB are divided into poor, tipical, good, excellent. Depending on the category & the quality is the cost. Saving Throw Bonus is divided into: None, role specific, threat specific. None costs zero, RS costs 60 & TS costs 100.
When building your class you pick and choose among those things and write down the cost, at the end you add everything and that's the cost to reach level 2. XP needed to reach next level doubles (almost always, almost exactly).
Say you build a class with everything excellent: HD 400 XP, Saves 250 XP (Saving Throw Bonus 100XP), Weapon training 250 XP, Armor Training 300 XP, Skill training 400 XP, Special Abilities 250 XP & BAB 400 XP.
So your class has 2350 XP to reach second level. And requires at least 9 in their prime attribute.
Recreating their core classes (no wizard nor cleric obviously) the math works perfectly.
If you give a class 2 Specials each costs individually and the costs add up.
IIRC OSE also published their own Class builder, this one isn't free and I haven't bought it.
Quote from: tenbones on January 31, 2022, 03:38:21 PM
I watched Crawfords interview talking about the new Mordenkainen's book on Races. And aside from the SJW sensitivities about race which are stupid, I rationally can understand why he wants races to not have cooked in stat modifiers... He says for years he wanted players to not min-max (my words) about stats and the importance stats have on Class mechanics with the implication that some races are better than others which leaves a bad feeling in his tummy... (aww...)
HOWEVER...
the implications of these mechanics means simply that there are no real cultural implications about these races, or for any of the settings these races are supposed to be native to. This notion that "not everyone is the same" is fine - but the pretense that the mechanical reality that underpins what a race has as attributes as a baseline average is silly because it's relative to humans and he pretends that's not it.
So setting lore and context don't matter as long as racial sensitivities which they promote as important are assuaged. Well this is the new 5e D&D. Enjoy!
So he admits that OD&D and Basic D&D has handled this better since the beginning.
Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 31, 2022, 09:57:54 PM
Quote from: Pat on January 31, 2022, 07:55:10 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 31, 2022, 07:46:33 PM
White lies published a build your own class suplement, it's free and their math works for the White Box FMAG based games.
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/167842/White-Lies--Admin-Toolkit-Class-Creation-Guide (https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/167842/White-Lies--Admin-Toolkit-Class-Creation-Guide)
What approach do they use?
HD, Saves, Weapon training, Armor Training, Skill training, Special Abilities & BAB are divided into poor, tipical, good, excellent. Depending on the category & the quality is the cost. Saving Throw Bonus is divided into: None, role specific, threat specific. None costs zero, RS costs 60 & TS costs 100.
When building your class you pick and choose among those things and write down the cost, at the end you add everything and that's the cost to reach level 2. XP needed to reach next level doubles (almost always, almost exactly).
Say you build a class with everything excellent: HD 400 XP, Saves 250 XP (Saving Throw Bonus 100XP), Weapon training 250 XP, Armor Training 300 XP, Skill training 400 XP, Special Abilities 250 XP & BAB 400 XP.
So your class has 2350 XP to reach second level. And requires at least 9 in their prime attribute.
Recreating their core classes (no wizard nor cleric obviously) the math works perfectly.
If you give a class 2 Specials each costs individually and the costs add up.
IIRC OSE also published their own Class builder, this one isn't free and I haven't bought it.
So it has the same fundamental flaw I just pointed out in the Dragon article: It uses a linear addition of XP in a system where XP grows geometrically.
Quote from: Pat on January 31, 2022, 10:51:02 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 31, 2022, 09:57:54 PM
Quote from: Pat on January 31, 2022, 07:55:10 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 31, 2022, 07:46:33 PM
White lies published a build your own class suplement, it's free and their math works for the White Box FMAG based games.
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/167842/White-Lies--Admin-Toolkit-Class-Creation-Guide (https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/167842/White-Lies--Admin-Toolkit-Class-Creation-Guide)
What approach do they use?
HD, Saves, Weapon training, Armor Training, Skill training, Special Abilities & BAB are divided into poor, tipical, good, excellent. Depending on the category & the quality is the cost. Saving Throw Bonus is divided into: None, role specific, threat specific. None costs zero, RS costs 60 & TS costs 100.
When building your class you pick and choose among those things and write down the cost, at the end you add everything and that's the cost to reach level 2. XP needed to reach next level doubles (almost always, almost exactly).
Say you build a class with everything excellent: HD 400 XP, Saves 250 XP (Saving Throw Bonus 100XP), Weapon training 250 XP, Armor Training 300 XP, Skill training 400 XP, Special Abilities 250 XP & BAB 400 XP.
So your class has 2350 XP to reach second level. And requires at least 9 in their prime attribute.
Recreating their core classes (no wizard nor cleric obviously) the math works perfectly.
If you give a class 2 Specials each costs individually and the costs add up.
IIRC OSE also published their own Class builder, this one isn't free and I haven't bought it.
So it has the same fundamental flaw I just pointed out in the Dragon article: It uses a linear addition of XP in a system where XP grows geometrically.
How is this a flaw? You're determining the initial XP, unless you want perfectly balanced classes?
Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 31, 2022, 11:44:09 PM
Quote from: Pat on January 31, 2022, 10:51:02 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 31, 2022, 09:57:54 PM
Quote from: Pat on January 31, 2022, 07:55:10 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 31, 2022, 07:46:33 PM
White lies published a build your own class suplement, it's free and their math works for the White Box FMAG based games.
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/167842/White-Lies--Admin-Toolkit-Class-Creation-Guide (https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/167842/White-Lies--Admin-Toolkit-Class-Creation-Guide)
What approach do they use?
HD, Saves, Weapon training, Armor Training, Skill training, Special Abilities & BAB are divided into poor, tipical, good, excellent. Depending on the category & the quality is the cost. Saving Throw Bonus is divided into: None, role specific, threat specific. None costs zero, RS costs 60 & TS costs 100.
When building your class you pick and choose among those things and write down the cost, at the end you add everything and that's the cost to reach level 2. XP needed to reach next level doubles (almost always, almost exactly).
Say you build a class with everything excellent: HD 400 XP, Saves 250 XP (Saving Throw Bonus 100XP), Weapon training 250 XP, Armor Training 300 XP, Skill training 400 XP, Special Abilities 250 XP & BAB 400 XP.
So your class has 2350 XP to reach second level. And requires at least 9 in their prime attribute.
Recreating their core classes (no wizard nor cleric obviously) the math works perfectly.
If you give a class 2 Specials each costs individually and the costs add up.
IIRC OSE also published their own Class builder, this one isn't free and I haven't bought it.
So it has the same fundamental flaw I just pointed out in the Dragon article: It uses a linear addition of XP in a system where XP grows geometrically.
How is this a flaw? You're determining the initial XP, unless you want perfectly balanced classes?
If you don't care about balance, why bother with a system? Just pick a number.
Quote from: Pat on January 31, 2022, 11:56:03 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 31, 2022, 11:44:09 PM
Quote from: Pat on January 31, 2022, 10:51:02 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 31, 2022, 09:57:54 PM
Quote from: Pat on January 31, 2022, 07:55:10 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 31, 2022, 07:46:33 PM
White lies published a build your own class suplement, it's free and their math works for the White Box FMAG based games.
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/167842/White-Lies--Admin-Toolkit-Class-Creation-Guide (https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/167842/White-Lies--Admin-Toolkit-Class-Creation-Guide)
What approach do they use?
HD, Saves, Weapon training, Armor Training, Skill training, Special Abilities & BAB are divided into poor, tipical, good, excellent. Depending on the category & the quality is the cost. Saving Throw Bonus is divided into: None, role specific, threat specific. None costs zero, RS costs 60 & TS costs 100.
When building your class you pick and choose among those things and write down the cost, at the end you add everything and that's the cost to reach level 2. XP needed to reach next level doubles (almost always, almost exactly).
Say you build a class with everything excellent: HD 400 XP, Saves 250 XP (Saving Throw Bonus 100XP), Weapon training 250 XP, Armor Training 300 XP, Skill training 400 XP, Special Abilities 250 XP & BAB 400 XP.
So your class has 2350 XP to reach second level. And requires at least 9 in their prime attribute.
Recreating their core classes (no wizard nor cleric obviously) the math works perfectly.
If you give a class 2 Specials each costs individually and the costs add up.
IIRC OSE also published their own Class builder, this one isn't free and I haven't bought it.
So it has the same fundamental flaw I just pointed out in the Dragon article: It uses a linear addition of XP in a system where XP grows geometrically.
How is this a flaw? You're determining the initial XP, unless you want perfectly balanced classes?
If you don't care about balance, why bother with a system? Just pick a number.
Because I care about consistency?
Your complaint was that their system didn't manage to reproduce what was on the core classes, I sugested you one that does work with it's core classes. Now you say you want one that's geometrical and not linear...
What exactly is it that you want on a class builder system?
I think you're conflating 2 different issues:
1.- Being able to recreate the core classes and build others following a consistent system.
2.- A geometrical progression of the classes.
If the math of the class builder works your other complaint is easy to fix: Make the progression linear.
If you want perfectly balanced classes maybe you should try 4e? I hear at least some effort was made in that regard.
As for balancing the classes, doesn't the fact that the MU progresses slowly than the other classes balance them?
If you don't like that then make magic into a skill and allow everybody to ise it, remove weapon/armor limitations and have everybody play Paladins, Warlocks.
Quote from: Hakdov on January 31, 2022, 10:07:26 PM
Quote from: tenbones on January 31, 2022, 03:38:21 PM
I watched Crawfords interview talking about the new Mordenkainen's book on Races. And aside from the SJW sensitivities about race which are stupid, I rationally can understand why he wants races to not have cooked in stat modifiers... He says for years he wanted players to not min-max (my words) about stats and the importance stats have on Class mechanics with the implication that some races are better than others which leaves a bad feeling in his tummy... (aww...)
HOWEVER...
the implications of these mechanics means simply that there are no real cultural implications about these races, or for any of the settings these races are supposed to be native to. This notion that "not everyone is the same" is fine - but the pretense that the mechanical reality that underpins what a race has as attributes as a baseline average is silly because it's relative to humans and he pretends that's not it.
So setting lore and context don't matter as long as racial sensitivities which they promote as important are assuaged. Well this is the new 5e D&D. Enjoy!
So he admits that OD&D and Basic D&D has handled this better since the beginning.
I had the same thought. And I also think we're better off without racial mods for ability scores: they're either too little to matter (AD&D's +/-1 in a game with a 7-14 on almost every attribute) or they're overpowered (+1 bonus to all d20 rolls on a broad range of actions) and encourage min/maxing.
But also Crawford can kiss my ass. Isn't he the guy who said women were put off by complexity in RPGs? (Way to stereotype!) And
also the guy who made the BS official ruled that negative Con mods can push HP gain negative in 5e, and the solution was to just not roll hit points?
(It's been a few years, so I may be confusing him with someone else.)
Quote from: GeekyBugle on February 01, 2022, 12:06:57 AM
Quote from: Pat on January 31, 2022, 11:56:03 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 31, 2022, 11:44:09 PM
Quote from: Pat on January 31, 2022, 10:51:02 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 31, 2022, 09:57:54 PM
Quote from: Pat on January 31, 2022, 07:55:10 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 31, 2022, 07:46:33 PM
White lies published a build your own class suplement, it's free and their math works for the White Box FMAG based games.
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/167842/White-Lies--Admin-Toolkit-Class-Creation-Guide (https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/167842/White-Lies--Admin-Toolkit-Class-Creation-Guide)
What approach do they use?
HD, Saves, Weapon training, Armor Training, Skill training, Special Abilities & BAB are divided into poor, tipical, good, excellent. Depending on the category & the quality is the cost. Saving Throw Bonus is divided into: None, role specific, threat specific. None costs zero, RS costs 60 & TS costs 100.
When building your class you pick and choose among those things and write down the cost, at the end you add everything and that's the cost to reach level 2. XP needed to reach next level doubles (almost always, almost exactly).
Say you build a class with everything excellent: HD 400 XP, Saves 250 XP (Saving Throw Bonus 100XP), Weapon training 250 XP, Armor Training 300 XP, Skill training 400 XP, Special Abilities 250 XP & BAB 400 XP.
So your class has 2350 XP to reach second level. And requires at least 9 in their prime attribute.
Recreating their core classes (no wizard nor cleric obviously) the math works perfectly.
If you give a class 2 Specials each costs individually and the costs add up.
IIRC OSE also published their own Class builder, this one isn't free and I haven't bought it.
So it has the same fundamental flaw I just pointed out in the Dragon article: It uses a linear addition of XP in a system where XP grows geometrically.
How is this a flaw? You're determining the initial XP, unless you want perfectly balanced classes?
If you don't care about balance, why bother with a system? Just pick a number.
Because I care about consistency?
Your complaint was that their system didn't manage to reproduce what was on the core classes, I sugested you one that does work with it's core classes. Now you say you want one that's geometrical and not linear...
What exactly is it that you want on a class builder system?
I think you're conflating 2 different issues:
1.- Being able to recreate the core classes and build others following a consistent system.
2.- A geometrical progression of the classes.
If the math of the class builder works your other complaint is easy to fix: Make the progression linear.
If you want perfectly balanced classes maybe you should try 4e? I hear at least some effort was made in that regard.
As for balancing the classes, doesn't the fact that the MU progresses slowly than the other classes balance them?
If you don't like that then make magic into a skill and allow everybody to ise it, remove weapon/armor limitations and have everybody play Paladins, Warlocks.
No, in the very first post you responded to, I explicitly pointed out that the larger issue is a class design system based on linear additive XP doesn't work with geometric XP progression. You even quoted it:
https://www.therpgsite.com/pen-paper-roleplaying-games-rpgs-discussion/from-wotc-to-hasbro/msg1205091/#msg1205091
Though you clearly didn't read it, because you recommended a system that does exactly that.
Converting XP to a linear system is not the simple fix you're pretending it is. Geometric XP progression is fundamental to the system. You have to change everything from monster XP to how much XP is given out for gold. Making everything into a skills is another extremely radical suggestion that completely changes the fundamental mechanics, which you're presenting as a simple fix.
And I'm not sure why you're claiming I want perfect balance, when my last suggestion was to eyeball it. I recommended picking a number because it's a simpler solution, and a better one because it involves human judgment, which can easily forestall the problems with a rigid but broken mechanistic system.
Whether a class costs 1,800 XP to advance, or 2,000 XP, matters very little in the long run. From a practical standpoint, all it really means is the second class will level maybe a session later than the first class. That's one of the key things that people who design these simple additive systems don't recognize: An XP penalty or bonus doesn't mean much. If you play in a game where it takes 10 sessions to advance one level, then what that means is 9 out of 10 sessions the 1,800 XP and 2,000 XP classes will be exactly the same level. On the 9th session, the 1,800 XP class will advance, and be a level ahead for a single session. But at the end of that next session, the 2,000 XP class will advance, and they'll both be the same level again. This will recur every new level (until name level), with the 1,800 XP class being ahead 1 out of 10 sessions.
To create a consistent difference -- to set it up so a powerful class is always at least 1 level behind -- you need to double the XP requirement. That's how the elf class works in B/X -- 4,000 XP to 2nd level, compared to the fighter's 2,000. That means after the fighter reaches 2nd level, the elf will always be exactly 1 level behind (until name level).
But the elf shows why even such an extreme penalty doesn't have a reliable or consistent effect. Instead, the relative power level of the elf and fighter will vary drastically, over the levels. The elf starts out enormously powerful, with almost all the benefits of a fighter and a magic-user, plus some. But when the fighter advances to 2nd level, the elf will feel pretty weak, because the fighter literally doubled in HD (1d8 to 2d8), while the elf is still stuck at 1d6. But after that, the elf remains exactly one level behind, but 1 level behind means more at 2nd level than at 9th level (going from 8d8 to 9d8 is much smaller than going from 1d8 to 2d8). It gets really awkward, with a huge dead spot at 1st level.
This breaks even further if you look at silly extreme examples, like the munchkin class in Dragon 109, which has all the powers of every class. It's a class that will start really strong, but then lag far behind the rest of the party, only to become a powerhouse again at mid levels.
And that's not even touching on how level progression changes when XP plateaus at name level, or the problems with cherry picking abilities, or specific problems with the different systems, like Dragon 109's MU problem.
Quote from: Omega on January 31, 2022, 07:18:52 PM
Quote from: Pat on January 31, 2022, 12:55:01 PM
Quote from: Omega on January 31, 2022, 02:29:16 AM
1: This was actually a thing for BX and 2e D&D. BX had a Dragon article introducing a "create your own class/race" system that was actually not bad. 2e had in the core books a watered down and more convoluted version. And later Skills & Powers opened up options as well. Think the Complete Handbook for Wizards did too. If not there then there was at least one ckass kit that opened up the ability to wear leather or chain I believe. Not positive though. Been a few decades.
The create your own class system in Dragon was badly broken. Among other things, it tried to argue that magic-users were underpowered and needed a boost.
er? Where? I glanced through it and saw no such claims of MUs being underpowered. There is a extra spell progression table that gives a few more spells but no mention of why other than the option for more at a cost? More likely what we are seeing is the authors attempt to combine the clerics and MU's progressions somehow.
In X a MU will have a level 11 spread as follows. 4 3 3 3 2 1
While the VIa from Dragon has a spread of thus. 4 4 3 3 3 2
And in comparison the O, AD&D and 2e has this. 4 4 4 3 3 -
3e has a sort of mix of O and BX in an odd sort. 4 4 4 3 2 1
4e is its own thing.
And 5e bemusingly enough goes back to BX with. 4 3 3 3 2 1
Rather interesting the permutations just this alone has undergone.
Aren't you forgetting something, Omega?
Namely, the extra spells bonus from 3E.
Also, it's pretty well documented that during the 3E overhaul Monte Cook was hell bent on buffing casters and nerfing martial classes.
Quote from: jhkim on January 31, 2022, 11:58:26 AM
Quote from: Omega on January 31, 2022, 02:42:00 AM
5e's writing has been all over the place. Overall ok. But around the advent of Essentials things started a slow decline. Then around Candlekeep a sharper decline. But you could say that of TSR too. Their product and modules were all over the place. Especially during 2e as they began to struggle with internal problems after ousting Gygax.
I agree that the writing is all over the place -- but I liked Candlekeep Mysteries more than the other adventures I'm familiar with - Lost Mine of Phandelver, Princes of the Apocalypse and Out of the Abyss. So I don't think I see the same pattern as you. I like the core rules, but I thought the initial adventures were mediocre at best.
On the rules front: I thought the Sword Coast Guide was decent, and Volo's Guide was OK, but Tasha's was terrible. Fizban's seems mediocre so far - but I haven't read it through yet. I do feel like the rules quality is decreasing, but that has been true for most games as they enter the "splat book" phase of releases.
Fair enough, like I said it's a matter of opinion. The first two Tiamat adventures were awful. I liked Apoc, SKT, Saltmarsh, and the rules/monster tomes, but likewise thought Tasha's and everything since was utter trash. Anyhow, I've simply stopped being interested in WoTC as a brand.
Quote from: Jamesbeadle on February 01, 2022, 02:18:54 PM
Quote from: jhkim on January 31, 2022, 11:58:26 AM
I agree that the writing is all over the place -- but I liked Candlekeep Mysteries more than the other adventures I'm familiar with - Lost Mine of Phandelver, Princes of the Apocalypse and Out of the Abyss. So I don't think I see the same pattern as you. I like the core rules, but I thought the initial adventures were mediocre at best.
On the rules front: I thought the Sword Coast Guide was decent, and Volo's Guide was OK, but Tasha's was terrible. Fizban's seems mediocre so far - but I haven't read it through yet. I do feel like the rules quality is decreasing, but that has been true for most games as they enter the "splat book" phase of releases.
Fair enough, like I said it's a matter of opinion. The first two Tiamat adventures were awful. I liked Apoc, SKT, Saltmarsh, and the rules/monster tomes, but likewise thought Tasha's and everything since was utter trash. Anyhow, I've simply stopped being interested in WoTC as a brand.
Whoops. Sorry, I mixed up modules there. I played through Hoard of the Dragon Queen - which I thought was awful, as you did. I only briefly got a look at Princes of the Apocalypse, so no opinion there. I don't know Storm King's Thunder or Saltmarsh.
I also didn't like Tasha's - and I'm curious which books you got after Tasha's that gave you the bad impression. For me, that's Candlekeep, Fizban's, and Van Richten's. As I said, I liked Candlekeep Mysteries - I'm unimpressed so far with Fizban's, and I thought Van Richten's was fair - my main issue being that I dislike the demi-plane aspect of the setting in the first place, which isn't about that book in particular.
Quote from: HappyDaze on January 31, 2022, 01:05:29 PM
I thought that the rules from the Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide were terrible, especially the cantrips (particularly booming blade) that got recommended for every power build and the racial variants (like winged tiefling).
Interesting. I never saw Booming Blade in play. Looking at it, it seems OK for its intended purpose (bladesingers and pact of blade) - but I could see it being combined with other options to be overpowered. But I think power builds using mix of optional components are best dealt with by disallowing them as GM, rather than trying to handle all possible combinations.
In Sword Coast - I liked the Oath of the Crown, and I particularly liked mastermind and swashbuckler for rogue.
I got the old books, dice, and paper's cheap.
So I don't give a rat's arse what wotc or hasbroken wants to do, they ain't getting my money.
Maybe I will get something from new TSR, just so they know SOMEONE cares and Ernie don't end up like those drunks at the pub.
Quote from: Redwanderer on February 01, 2022, 04:45:41 PM
I got the old books, dice, and paper's cheap.
So I don't give a rat's arse what wotc or hasbroken wants to do, they ain't getting my money.
Maybe I will get something from new TSR, just so they know SOMEONE cares and Ernie don't end up like those drunks at the pub.
I do not think you can buy enough stuff to keep Ernie from hitting the skids.
The TSR stuff is not showing off well.
We have this (https://i.imgur.com/q1gwbM7.png)
but
(https://i.imgur.com/f6xDkQF.png)
Supposedly it is a 5th Ed product.
Then there is this
(https://i.imgur.com/ZYtJ0fp.png)
So I'm not up to date on the new TSR and new products they are making. I recall that Gygax's kid was involved in some trade IP dispute with another company over it but am fuzzy on the details. Is Star Frontiers related to this? Was there a Kickstarter or something?
The nu TSR (3) is doing Star Frontiers but it seems they own the name and not the IP. They are going to give a copy away to anyone who buys a $100 ticket to play at TSR CON
https://www.facebook.com/TSRCON/
Quote from: palaeomerus on February 01, 2022, 06:36:36 PM
The nu TSR (3) is doing Star Frontiers but it seems they own the name and not the IP. They are going to give a copy away to anyone who buys a $100 ticket to play at TSR CON
https://www.facebook.com/TSRCON/
So TSR con, this is a new convention they are promoting or something that's been around a while? Is the idea above that they wont really have books to hand out, or that the professional looking books in the fake stack will not be the game that is being promised?
Quote from: Jamesbeadle on February 01, 2022, 06:40:19 PM
Quote from: palaeomerus on February 01, 2022, 06:36:36 PM
The nu TSR (3) is doing Star Frontiers but it seems they own the name and not the IP. They are going to give a copy away to anyone who buys a $100 ticket to play at TSR CON
https://www.facebook.com/TSRCON/
So TSR con, this is a new convention they are promoting or something that's been around a while? Is the idea above that they wont really have books to hand out, or that the professional looking books in the fake stack will not be the game that is being promised?
TSR CON is a new convention, to be held for the first time in Lake Geneva in March 2022 -- which is on the same weekend in Lake Geneva as Gary Con - which *is* an established game convention that has been running since 2009. TSR CON is sponsored by the new TSR -- which was founded in summer 2021. There have been *three* TSRs:
(1) the original founded by Gary Gygax
(2) a revival founded in 2011 by Jayson Elliot when the trademark expired
(3) a second revival founded in summer 2021 by Ernie Gygax, Justin LaNasa and Stephen Dinehart
cf. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TSR,_Inc.#Subsequent_trademark_usage
They plan to have books, I'm sure but they chose to simulate a pile of books in the mean time. The thing is though...will they have books by then? Real ones? No idea. I'm sure they plan to have real books. But will it happen?
Quote from: jhkim on February 01, 2022, 07:12:43 PM
Quote from: Jamesbeadle on February 01, 2022, 06:40:19 PM
Quote from: palaeomerus on February 01, 2022, 06:36:36 PM
The nu TSR (3) is doing Star Frontiers but it seems they own the name and not the IP. They are going to give a copy away to anyone who buys a $100 ticket to play at TSR CON
https://www.facebook.com/TSRCON/
So TSR con, this is a new convention they are promoting or something that's been around a while? Is the idea above that they wont really have books to hand out, or that the professional looking books in the fake stack will not be the game that is being promised?
TSR CON is a new convention, to be held for the first time in Lake Geneva in March 2022 -- which is on the same weekend in Lake Geneva as Gary Con - which *is* an established game convention that has been running since 2009. TSR CON is sponsored by the new TSR -- which was founded in summer 2021. There have been *three* TSRs:
(1) the original founded by Gary Gygax
(2) a revival founded in 2011 by Jayson Elliot when the trademark expired
(3) a second revival founded in summer 2021 by Ernie Gygax, Justin LaNasa and Stephen Dinehart
cf. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TSR,_Inc.#Subsequent_trademark_usage
Ok, thanks for bringing me up to speed.
Quote from: palaeomerus on February 01, 2022, 07:39:07 PM
They plan to have books, I'm sure but they chose to simulate a pile of books in the mean time. The thing is though...will they have books by then? Real ones? No idea. I'm sure they plan to have real books. But will it happen?
Hey, with the news
Far West might
actually come out this side of doomsday, then the cracks in reality ã̻͚ͬͅr̼̺̩ͬ͂e̼̮̓̏͊ ͈̍ͭ͌̋ẅ̭̠́̽͊í͖͚͆̅d̘̐̏̆̓e̗̲͔͋̑n̍̅̔͌͐ị̱̹̀̔n̝͔̘̓̊g͔̀ͦ̇ͧ,̯̼ͨͣͥ ̗ͪͪ̋͋ã̌̐̊̉n̳̈́̅̔̑d̯̞̗͗͛ ̰̪̫ͩ̽A̞̲͒̎̾n̤̹̞̭ͤy͎̙͛̌̚t̖̰ͧ̾͆h̤̹ͥͤ̂i͍͊́͒ͣn͚͈̜ͭͥg̭͗͌̉̐ ̝͈̺̠͋c̺̺̙̋ͫa̦̪̋̀͐N̜ͤ̑̂̃ ̥̘͚͗ͭH̫͇̜̳̏A̘̞̯̮ͬp̣̫͕͛͐p̰̟͓͊ͣÈ͔̭̞̐Ǹ̼̮̮̓.͓ͬ̌͂ͩ
İ̘̲͕̙T͈ͧͧ͑ͯ ̞̮ͭ̍͒C̣̯ͩͩ͊O̺̤̫ͩͮṀ̳̼̽̓E̦̥͗̾ͪS̟̟͂ͮ͆
Cue King Crimson's "Epitaph"
Quote from: palaeomerus on February 01, 2022, 05:19:16 PM
The TSR stuff is not showing off well.
We have this (https://i.imgur.com/q1gwbM7.png)
Fake stack of books or not, the art looks more like Metamorphosis Alpha than Star Frontiers.
Quote from: Jamesbeadle on February 01, 2022, 07:45:19 PM
Quote from: jhkim on February 01, 2022, 07:12:43 PM
Quote from: Jamesbeadle on February 01, 2022, 06:40:19 PM
So TSR con, this is a new convention they are promoting or something that's been around a while? Is the idea above that they wont really have books to hand out, or that the professional looking books in the fake stack will not be the game that is being promised?
TSR CON is a new convention, to be held for the first time in Lake Geneva in March 2022 -- which is on the same weekend in Lake Geneva as Gary Con - which *is* an established game convention that has been running since 2009. TSR CON is sponsored by the new TSR -- which was founded in summer 2021. There have been *three* TSRs:
(1) the original founded by Gary Gygax
(2) a revival founded in 2011 by Jayson Elliot when the trademark expired
(3) a second revival founded in summer 2021 by Ernie Gygax, Justin LaNasa and Stephen Dinehart
cf. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TSR,_Inc.#Subsequent_trademark_usage
Ok, thanks for bringing me up to speed.
Just FYI, the Elliot TSR produced Top Secret: New World Order - an update of the Top Secret game that I've glanced over when someone was running a game, but haven't tried or read.
The new TSR's release is the science fantasy game Giantlands, which according to the Kickstarter supposedly shipped in December. Has anyone here seen it?
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/dinehart/giantlands-limited-edition-boxed-set/posts
I think Giantlands went their own way and dumped the TSR branding and are selling it via Wonderfilled Games which associates with Ernie but is not run by him. I think they also list Larry Elmore, John Dee, and Ward in their stable. I don't know if they put Giantlands out yet.
Quote from: palaeomerus on February 02, 2022, 12:15:54 PM
I think Giantlands went their own way and dumped the TSR branding and are selling it via Wonderfilled Games which associates with Ernie but is not run by him. I think they also list Larry Elmore, John Dee, and Ward in their stable. I don't know if they put Giantlands out yet.
According to the Kickstarter, they shipped in December. But they only had 77 backers, and I can't see any reviews from search. Here's the supposed release message from the Kickstarter:
QuoteStephen E. Dinehart IV
December 21, 2021
Hey all, I'm shipping this week though only domestically, because of the pandemic international orders will take extra time. Thanks for you support! If you backed for more than one unit you should have already received it yesterday or today via UPS. If you ordered a single they will begin being processed by USPS this evening in California. Please send me a message if you have any questions. Thanks so much and happy holidays!
From what I see, Wonderfilled is just a new name of the third TSR. I would note that "tsr.games" (which was the previous TSR site) now redirects to "wfd.games". Some more details here:
https://www.belloflostsouls.net/2021/07/rpg-the-new-tsr-saga-ends-no-more-tsrs.html
Deleted - new topic started...