Quote from: J Arcane;358340So your characters are literally hands of fucking collectible cards?

Apparently.

It's an interesting design decision because among the most widespread complaints about 4E at its inception (so before we had splats) was the lack of character customization. If a game runs solely on cards, I wonder if you still roll up for stats and so on, and how similar the characters end up being. Except with their selection of "powers" (whatever), of course, and that's where randomized distribution gets us back to PC differentiation.

And while such randomization isn't a good replacement for customization, I think the design does address a real need nontheless. See, some 4E gamers can't stand to re-do the math for the numbers on their power cards every time they level up. It's not hard to do mentally (and the DDI does it for you if you wish), but it gets tedious to wipe and rewrite the numbers on your power cards with dry erase when it doesn't even work perfectly (though the cards are luminated). Much easier to simply get a new stash of cards ready to be played with when your character receives new options. You may not be such a person, but to someone who only games casually and irregularly, being spared such tasks is a godsend.

Finally, randomized content isn't evil if the disparity between good (rare) and not-so-good (non-rare) options is negligible in play. WotC did a randomized minis game some time ago, Dreamblade, where you'd be fine even in tournaments to only play with common and uncommon minis, because they were balanced exceedingly well against rares. If GW 2010 goes that route, it won't destroy (what you call) the culture of optimized builds.

You might turn out to be correct, but I say: wait and see.

Quote from: ggroy;358226A cynic could argue that 4E Gamma World with random boosters is WotC's way of "testing" the market, to see how receptive it is to a product merger of "Magic: the Gathering" style marketing with D&D type rpgs.  If this turns out to be successful saleswise, then one shouldn't be too surprised if 5E D&D will also follow the random booster cards marketing model.

I suppose they didn't do this random booster cards thing with 4E D&D, for the reason that they were not sure how the market would respond at the time (in 2008).  If it turned out to produce a huge fallout, then it would forever tarnish D&D (more than it already has been).  Doing such a market test on a "secondary" rpg product line, would most likely have less of a fallout.  They could just quietly end the 4E Gamma World product line, if it turns out to be a failure.  The same can't be done as easily with 4E D&D.

I think that's quite a good call - at first sight. Because, as you probably know, TGCs only generate a fraction of the income for WotC they once did. So if M:tG will be even weaker in 2012-2014 (earliest I expect 5E) I am not convinced WotC is willing to base their product design for D&D on a waning product model. I agree though that Gamma World is very clearly serving the secondary function to test the market. That observation of yours is spot on.

Quote from: Windjammer;358353Finally, randomized content isn't evil if the disparity between good (rare) and not-so-good (non-rare) options is negligible in play. WotC did a randomized minis game some time ago, Dreamblade, where you'd be fine even in tournaments to only play with common and uncommon minis, because they were balanced exceedingly well against rares. If GW 2010 goes that route, it won't destroy (what you call) the culture of optimized builds.

You might turn out to be correct, but I say: wait and see.

On the other side of the coin if WotC decides to go all out "munchkin powergamer" for 5E D&D using randomized booster card packs, it would probably be easier to do the rare card thing for things like magic items and maybe feats.

It would seem largely pointless to do random cards for the generic regular classes, races, powers, weapons, etc ... such as:   cleric, fighter, paladin, wizard, elves, dwarfs, human, halfling, rogue, drow, ranger, dagger, sword, shield, etc ...

On the other hand, they could decide to make some player races, classes, powers, monsters, etc ... as rare cards, which were not so popular in 4E and older previous editions.  This could include stuff like: tiefling, dragonborn, avenger, invoker, deva, etc ....

Heh.  Marginal less popular monsters from the 3E/3.5E/4E D&D monster manuals as "rare cards" ...  That would sure make them "popular" amongst the collectors.  :rolleyes:

Quote from: Windjammer;358354Because, as you probably know, TGCs only generate a fraction of the income for WotC they once did. So if M:tG will be even weaker in 2012-2014 (earliest I expect 5E) I am not convinced WotC is willing to base their product design for D&D on a waning product model.

The merger of two waning marketing models of 4E D&D + M:tG = ?

-> Monstrous failure of epic proportions?  (ie.  Another "götterdämmerung").

-> A new beginning?  (ie.  A New Hope).

:cool:

Did the folks who actually played the new Gamma World or saw it in person say that it was all card-based? Or it that just an assumption based on a blurry photo?

Seanchai

Quote from: J Arcane;358340WTF?  So your characters are literally hands of fucking collectible cards?

How in hell is this even an RPG anymore?

I hate needless treadmill models, but I don't see how this keeps it from being an RPG, or is any different from White-Wolf putting out tons of crappy splats.

Quote from: Peregrin;358373I hate needless treadmill models, but I don't see how this keeps it from being an RPG, or is any different from White-Wolf putting out tons of crappy splats.

It may still play as an RPG, but the gambling element makes it different.

The 'complete' stand-alone box set will provide 40 cards for the GM to use.

There will be 120 booster cards (I'm presuming they'll be released at the same time, but they have it already scheduled, anyway) sold in random, sealed packs of 8 cards at $3.99/pack.

This isn't a case where a complete game is a success, and a decision is made to produce more material (of any quality) to support that success.  The designers took roughly 160 of their best ideas and put them on cards, then took 3/4 of those ideas out of the 'stand-alone' game, and now they're marketing them to people willing to buy a pig in a poke.

Is this really the same as WW putting out tons of crappy splats?

Quote from: MarionPoliquin;358084WotC is re-releasing Gamma World as a stand-alone boxed set RPG based on 4e.

http://wizards.com/dnd/Product.aspx?x=dnd/products/dndacc/254600000

That looks very interesting. Looks like they have three products planned from October to September.

Great, first we have D&D 4.0, the pen and paper MMORPG and now they are doing the same thing to Gama World.

What a shame, wizards will ruin yet another game

Quote from: Seanchai;358363Did the folks who actually played the new Gamma World or saw it in person say that it was all card-based? Or it that just an assumption based on a blurry photo?

Seanchai

Discussions would be a lot shorter (and a lot less hateful) if everyone just did the former.

Regards,
David R

Folks, I think you've missed something here.  The way that WOTC's handling the new Gamma World edition--making it an add-on to D&D4 in all but name--is that WOTC says "The only difference between D&D and Gamma World are the trappings."

Recall that Dark Sun shall also come out this year for D&D4.  Both it and Gamma World are post-apocalyptic adventure settings, with one labeled "Fantasy" and the other "Science Fiction".  Yet, for all intents and purposes, they are nothing more than alternate skins for D&D4.  There is sweet-fuck all difference of substance.

Now, remember that WOTC shall end its Star Wars license this year, killing Star Wars Saga Edition as well as its miniatures game.  Remember that Hasbro has a license for everything but RPGs, and that WOTC is an arm of Hasbro.  Recall that Saga Edition was used as a test bed for many concepts now commonplace in D&D4, and that this was not the first time WOTC did it.

Apparently there is a lack of interest sufficient to make maintaining the Saga Edition and its license for WOTC, but if they can successfully prove through a successful D&D4:GW launch, then after a suitable fallow period when most of a dead game's user network abandons it for a living game substitute, WOTC (by way of Hasbro) can get a new license and produce D&D4:SW.

WOTC will likely try to shoehorn other IP it owns into the D&D4 framework if Gamma World succeeds, and with each offering they proclaim "There is no real difference between (X) and D&D for RPG purposes, so you might as well play a reskinned D&D."  They don't have to succeed often to once again get a stranglehold on the product category, and with the new boardgames that will be released this year they clearly argue that D&D really is a boardgame with infinite content expandability- and these games are a new variety of acquisition products.

Quote from: David R;358416Discussions would be a lot shorter (and a lot less hateful) if everyone just did the former.

True. I was looking at some stuff a person who apparently was there posted, "The game also has a card component. A deck of 80 cards with 40 tech cards and 40 mutation cards you might suddently manifest," and it sounds like cards are just a component, not the basis of the game.

Seanchai

Player: "OK, so here's my Gamma World character. His mutations are Kinetic Bolt, Precognition and Anti-Necrobiosis."

DM: "Anti-Necrobiosis? Cool! So you are collecting the boosters now?"

Player: "Uh, actually my buddy just told me about the mutation and I wrote down the details. But you can check it with your DDI subscription."

DM: "Sorry, go out and buy a few boosters if you really want that mutation."

Player: mumbles and starts thinking about Mutant Future.

In other words, FUCK OFF WITH YOUR COLLECTIBLE CARDS.

Potential up-side: Gamma World minis if the rpg does well enough?

I have to wonder how compatible D&D4 and GW will be, mechanically - in other words, are we going to see a Dragon article about incorporating the mutation cards into your 'normal' D&D game?  I'd put money on it.

I believe that we should all take a moment and











THINK OF THE CHILDREN1111!!!

We are.

We are thinking of our inner child.

Regards,
David R