Quote from: RPGPundit;1023172I think that on the whole, unless you had Hasbro levels of money, it would make a lot more sense to use a system that made it compatible with the most popular existing games.

And your own TV/Movie franchise to base the yet-another-game-system on.

Quote from: tenbones;1023327Do you believe that D&D's mechanics are the best mechanics for all genres? I don't. This is not to say I couldn't shoe-horn any genre into 5e, I just think it'd be clunky and a pain in the ass to develop for.

No, not every genre. But a shitload of them, as the OSR has proven.

And probably most of the genres Modiphius has covered, for example.

Well I just dropped $575 for the Star Trek Borg Cube.

I love me some Star Trek. I'm fine with the 2d20 system. I'd prefer the old CODA system but this works.

Quote from: Ulairi;1022851Top 5 in the RPGs doesn't impress me at all.

...OK, then I simply have nothing to discuss with you. At least when related to the industry at large:).

Quote from: RPGPundit;1023713No, not every genre. But a shitload of them, as the OSR has proven.

And probably most of the genres Modiphius has covered, for example.

Despite what you think, the OSR has "proven" no such thing, Pundit. It only prove that you can stuff square pegs into round holes if you try hard enough that the pegs stop being square.
In other words, nothing we didn't already know;).


Maybe I should reinstitute my "no D&D-derived games" policy.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;1019405This is my experience with the Conan quickstart.  I do not like systems that make me 'hostile' towards the players.

I found it quite refreshing for a change, and I like variety, just as in the CORTEX Marvel Superhero game where player superheroics power up the GM's pool to deal dreadfulness from the NPCs.

Quote from: tzunder;1024140I found it quite refreshing for a change, and I like variety, just as in the CORTEX Marvel Superhero game where player superheroics power up the GM's pool to deal dreadfulness from the NPCs.

Anyone know the first RPG that used this sort of mechanic: where the players using a particular power or point gives the GM something to use against the players? The first I saw of it was in the Dragonlance SAGA game (later much improved by the Marvel SAGA system) in '96.

Quote from: hedgehobbit;1024403Anyone know the first RPG that used this sort of mechanic: where the players using a particular power or point gives the GM something to use against the players? The first I saw of it was in the Dragonlance SAGA game (later much improved by the Marvel SAGA system) in '96.

  Actually, that mechanic only showed up in the Marvel iteration, although Dragonlance did have a sort of prototype with "if you play a Dragon card and fail, it's a mishap."

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;1024429Actually, that mechanic only showed up in the Marvel iteration, although Dragonlance did have a sort of prototype with "if you play a Dragon card and fail, it's a mishap."

I only played the Marvel version, I guess I just assumed that the Dragon cards from Dragonlance worked the same way.

Quote from: RPGPundit;1023172I think that on the whole, unless you had Hasbro levels of money, it would make a lot more sense to use a system that made it compatible with the most popular existing games.

Assuming your primary goal is to sell a bunch of games, instead of producing the game you really want as a labor of love.

Though that raises the question of why a writer that would develop their own system for a particular game as a labor of love would then use that same system for a wide variety of games.  Seems somewhat the worst of both worlds.

Quote from: Ulairi;1023809Well I just dropped $575 for the Star Trek Borg Cube.

What the actual fucking fuck?

I hope said Borg Cube is covered in diamond dust and comes in a white Rhino leather box.

Quote from: One Horse Town;1024472What the actual fucking fuck?

I hope said Borg Cube is covered in diamond dust and comes in a white Rhino leather box.

I'm a sucker for Star Trek stuff and I got a nice bonus. It includes a lot of stuff.

Quote from: RPGPundit;1023173And as for Pathfinder, it's ultimately doomed to go the way of White Wolf. Whenever another game has become a truly serious contender against D&D, it's because D&D was being horribly mismanaged. If the ship gets righted, then the competitor starts to gradually lose market share until it's either reduced down to a strictly second-rate level (IF the company in question makes adjustments based on understanding that their bonanza days are over), or it goes broke (because it was under the delusion that it would somehow be able to keep being as strong when faced with a competent D&D as its opposition).

While I do think that Paizo has had some issues of late, I also think that Pathfinder & 5e target significantly different gamers.

Plus - while Pathfinder has lost market %, from everything I've read their sales haven't actually suffered, 5e has just expanded the market.  Which - is great.  D&D is the way most TTRPG players are introduced to the hobby, so it makes total sense that it be a bit on the light side.  (Not that 5e is truly lite - I'd say that it's middling, but with enough gated mechanics behind class/level that it's not difficult to get into either.)  Pathfinder's crunchier and more customizable.  They scratch different itches.  (I like both - though I haven't gotten to play much 5e.)

Frankly - D&D doing well is good for the RPG market as a whole.  Which - is true of the market leader of most markets - ESPECIALLY niche ones.  The general rule is that the market leader focuses on expanding the market (not out of the goodness of their hearts - but because since they already dominate, they don't gain much by trying to steal sales) while the other contenders try to siphon off market share from said market leader, at least partially getting consumers that the market leader might lose anyway (because they don't like the market leader's product for whatever reason - but are at least okay with the idea of it).

Heck - that's why most soup commercials compare themselves to Campbell's (at least implicitly) but Campbell's commercials just go "MMMmmmmm Soup!" - because they know that if you buy soup, there's a good chance that it's Campbell's.

Pathfinder has a relic 3e-fan population still buying PF books. A substantial population, probably still bigger than the 4e D&D fandom EVER was! But I'm not seeing the new converts coming - that pretty much stopped dead with the release of 5e in late 2014.

And if anything, from what I see 5e D&D is doing even better now than on release! The new approach has been hugely, hugely successful in generating new players. Who mostly buy a PHB (some buy nothing, some buy more). WoTC makes money from that, but they also generate a network effect - the more dominant 5e is, the more it becomes.

Pathfinder has a great Beginner Box, by far the best starter set ever produced (Mentzer Red Box might edge it for the player, but for GMs the PF BB has no match). But their core model is to sell huge piles of crud to a slowly shrinking market.

Quote from: AsenRG;1024137Despite what you think, the OSR has "proven" no such thing, Pundit. It only prove that you can stuff square pegs into round holes if you try hard enough that the pegs stop being square.
In other words, nothing we didn't already know;).

Well then, defend your position, bitch: which OSR game do you want to claim is a 'square peg in a round hole'? What kind of RPG genre absolutely demands dice pools or fucking hero-point mechanics to the extent that the OSR failed at emulating it?

Quote from: Ulairi;1023809Well I just dropped $575 for the Star Trek Borg Cube.

I love me some Star Trek. I'm fine with the 2d20 system. I'd prefer the old CODA system but this works.

What a complete waste of time/money.