So now Monte has announced his upcoming new rpg: Numenera (http://www.montecookgames.com/announcing-numenera/) - Sci-Fi, Kickstarter, new system, easy to gm, lots to discuss but is anyone interested in what MC's got to offer anymore?
I am interested.
Very intrigued, yes I am.:)
Quote from: Benoist;569176I am interested.
I figured you would be :)
I skimmed the Numenera site (http://www.numenera.com) and looks, and sounds, rather Gamma World-ish. New civilization with nanotech and bio-enginered stuff from the past (worlds).
And the rules will build on D20 rolls - not rocking the boat here with a groundbreaking d12 mechanism ;)
I think what will be most interesting to see is, whether it is the setting or the rules that will make-or-break this for people with an initial interest. I own Ptolus, so I know Monte can build a fascinating world and he has done some, in some circles, popular rules. Question is whether he can carve out more than a niché with this game.
Monte's Dark Space was good fun, I'm far more interested in Numenera than him doing D&DNext.
Is he going to release it under an open licence ?
The setting and what he wants to accomplish actually sounds interesting. But given his previous work, I don't have much hope that the system part will appeal to me. We'll see . . .
the xp-as-resource (http://www.numenera.com/game-play/) thing sounds neat.
To somebody who didn't like D&D 3rd edition at all, can you explain to me what makes Monte Cook a good rules designer and worth following?
I liked some of the stuff he did for Planescape back in the day, but apart from that, what is it about that guy? I don't mean that facetiously. "Sell me on Monte Cook", as they would say at TBP.
not interested at all in this genre
Quote from: noisms;569197To somebody who didn't like D&D 3rd edition at all, can you explain to me what makes Monte Cook a good rules designer and worth following?
It's a question of timing and confidence - he knows Numenera will be seen as his reaction to working on 5e so he's bound to go all out to make the game count. He's making all the right noises e.g. intuitive simplicity of design, the symbiosis of rules and setting. He makes good choices - checkout the art on the website.
There's a narrowing window of opportunity (even for a 'name' designer) before the Kickstarter glut bloats out and projects start getting lost in the constant buzz, so I hope he succeeds on KS.
Quote from: Sean !;569209He makes good choices - checkout the art on the website.
Quote:
"The art that you see here is from the concept work that Kieran [Yanner] and I have been working on."I really really like that concept art style that leaves a lot to the interpretation and imagination of the reader but I fear that the final art will be more defined and polished, and thus look like most other games.
I am definitely interested in this product.
Quote from: noisms;569197To somebody who didn't like D&D 3rd edition at all, can you explain to me what makes Monte Cook a good rules designer and worth following?
I liked some of the stuff he did for Planescape back in the day, but apart from that, what is it about that guy? I don't mean that facetiously. "Sell me on Monte Cook", as they would say at TBP.
If you don't like his stuff, then you don't like his stuff. I happen to think he is a designer who excels at setting and mechanics. But that is a personal judgement call. D20 Cthulu really stands out in my mind. Suggest reading it if you haven't. But I have seen too many of these "what is so great about cook" threads at this stage, either you like him or you don't. Lately it seems lots of folks take this route to score easy internet points (not suggesting you are doing that here but he is a common target these days).
Monte does interesting settings, even when I'm not crazy about the mechanics. I still want to run or play Arcana Evolved one of these days.
But I'd like to see a bit more about the game before proclaiming my interest.
(http://weknowmemes.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/sort-of-want-face.jpg)
Quote from: BedrockBrendan;569216If you don't like his stuff, then you don't like his stuff. I happen to think he is a designer who excels at setting and mechanics. But that is a personal judgement call. D20 Cthulu really stands out in my mind. Suggest reading it if you haven't. But I have seen too many of these "what is so great about cook" threads at this stage, either you like him or you don't. Lately it seems lots of folks take this route to score easy internet points (not suggesting you are doing that here but he is a common target these days).
I've honestly never seen a thread about that before.
Quote from: beeber;569191the xp-as-resource (http://www.numenera.com/game-play/) thing sounds neat.
Quote from: Monte CookCharacters earn XP when they make new, interesting discoveries (not from killing things, although combat is often necessary to make discoveries and accomplish missions). They also earn XP when the GM "intrudes" on the action of the game to introduce new complications. Lastly, players have the ability to award XP to other players for great ideas, useful actions, or other reasons.
XP can be spent to increase character abilities, or to affect events in the game (such as rerolling dice), gain short-term benefits or advance in levels.
Sounds metagamey and dissassociated.
Quote from: noisms;569218I've honestly never seen a thread about that before.
I have seen plenty of posts in threads on game design.
Quote from: Ladybird;569220Sounds metagamey and dissassociated.
It's a story game!!
Quote from: noisms;569222It's a story game!!
No, it sounds like a game with mechanics that would force me out of character immersion
as a player, and would hobble a GM by forcing him to compensate the players for giving them things to do.
"Hey guys, sorry I gave you a challenging session that forced you to think about the situation and how to best apply your character's abilities, traits and history in order to survive. Here's some XP to compensate you for having fun.
I'm so sorry, please don't hate me."
Having both short and long term uses of the same resource pool also doesn't tend to work well. You will always be better off saving for the long-term usage, unless you are about to die RIGHT NOW, in which case it's okay. If the resulting power discrepancy (Between characters who use the short-term option instead of the long-term options) gets too high, then you can easily end up with a situation where the group simply can't operate together any more (See Exalted for an example of a game that handles varying intra-party power levels very, very poorly).
It's also a mechanic that completely changes if you're playing session games against a campaign - the shorter the length of time you'll play the character, the more valuable the short-term expenditure options become.
Quote from: Ladybird;569226No, it sounds like a game with mechanics that would force me out of character immersion as a player, and would hobble a GM by forcing him to compensate the players for giving them things to do.
"Hey guys, sorry I gave you a challenging session that forced you to think about the situation and how to best apply your character's abilities, traits and history in order to survive. Here's some XP to compensate you for having fun. I'm so sorry, please don't hate me."
Having both short and long term uses of the same resource pool also doesn't tend to work well. You will always be better off saving for the long-term usage, unless you are about to die RIGHT NOW, in which case it's okay. If the resulting power discrepancy (Between characters who use the short-term option instead of the long-term options) gets too high, then you can easily end up with a situation where the group simply can't operate together any more (See Exalted for an example of a game that handles varying intra-party power levels very, very poorly).
It's also a mechanic that completely changes if you're playing session games against a campaign - the shorter the length of time you'll play the character, the more valuable the short-term expenditure options become.
I know, I was being facetious.
I mostly agree with you, but I'm willing to give it the benefit of the doubt to see how it works in practice.
Quote from: noisms;569227I know, I was being facetious.
I mostly agree with you, but I'm willing to give it the benefit of the doubt to see how it works in practice.
Cool. At the moment, I don't think it offers anything I want (And that it offers some things I definitely don't want), but I'm willing to wait and see.
I like how he's nerfed wizards just by calling them 'Nanos' - how dorky a class name is that.
I notice that he's got the same basic class structure as SWN, or is that a trend that's popped up recently? I didn't really pay much attention to new games coming out before I dropped in here.
I don't think Cook is one of those designers who is terribly caught up many of the internet ideolgies floating around these days (whether its immersion, "modern design", the school of balance, forge theory, etc)...in fact I think a lot of the flak leveled at him when he posted about Next was due to him really not having much interest in these distinctions (and therefore much concern for the buzzwords involved). So if you go to cook, you are not going to get a game that toes a party line I think. To me this isn't a problem. In fact, it is a bit refreshing to see him hint at this in some of his recent articles. He writes games that interest him, and doesn't seem too worried about pleasing the RPGsite, SA, GD or RPGnet delegations.
The reason people freak out about any sign of dissociated or similar kinds of things in Next, is because 4E was saturated with them. I can handle stuff like that in small doses, or where it might actually make a decent trade off for ease of play. For me it isn't, well that is dissociated or might impact immersion, so it is bad. I need to see the complete product to make a judgment and I prefer to make my judgment on a case by case basis.
Quote from: NumenaraThey also earn XP when the GM “intrudes” on the action of the game to introduce new complications.
Sounds FATEish, or "DoomPool-ey", definitely narrative, or as LadyBird said, metagamey. Guess once you move to Seattle, you become absorbed into the
Laws Narrative Collective.
Someone should tell Monte disabling right click doesn't stop someone from Copy and Pasting, or even getting to art -
(http://www.numenera.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Rider.jpeg)
See? Told you.
Quote from: BedrockBrendan;569216But I have seen too many of these "what is so great about cook" threads at this stage, either you like him or you don't. Lately it seems lots of folks take this route to score easy internet points (not suggesting you are doing that here but he is a common target these days).
I think that Cook is one of the few designers to whom one can apply the word "author" - the way, for example, David Lynch is. I couldn't stand David Lynch, then I saw "Mulholland Drive" and "Eraserhead" in a double feature, and it become overnight one of my favourite directors. Why? I don't think one can really seek a rational answer, OTOH, people like Brett Ratner leave me completely indifferent.
Having said that, the "New Year in Times Square" way the Forgites saluted his departure from 5E is a sure hint that Cook did more good things than bad things in his career as a game designer.
Quote from: CRKrueger;569253Someone should tell Monte disabling right click doesn't stop someone from Copy and Pasting, or even getting to art -
He didn't disable it. The pic on the website is a link to where the main pic is. Just left-click the smaller pic on his website to go to the main pic, and then you can right-click and save.
*yawn*
I don't get the Monte-adulation.
And yet another sci-fantasy game? Yeah, there's an underserved market-segment screaming for attention.
The XP mechanic reminds me very much of WEG's D6, which worked just fine for years of play. Check out the 'favorite Star Wars' poll, for example.
Ill be checking it out. I don't think having a long history in RPGs (which Monte has) necessarily is a requirement to designing a good game, but Monte has had his hands all over some good games. I dont think he has anything he needs to prove, other than his new game convinces me to open my wallet.
One thing that seems a bit odd to me is the limited number of character classes. When there are so few like this, it makes me think a game is being groomed for being used in a video game.
Quote from: danbuter;569256He didn't disable it. The pic on the website is a link to where the main pic is. Just left-click the smaller pic on his website to go to the main pic, and then you can right-click and save.
Right-Click anything on the main site, it's been disabled, but, that doesn't stop you from getting to the stuff, so not sure why it's been disabled, that's so 90's. :D
This, I'll be getting and running.
Quote from: CRKrueger;569263Right-Click anything on the main site, it's been disabled, but, that doesn't stop you from getting to the stuff, so not sure why it's been disabled, that's so 90's. :D
It seems to be built into the WordPress theme that the site uses:
http://themes.themeprovince.com/village/
Quote from: Black Vulmea;569257*yawn*
I don't get the Monte-adulation.
And yet another sci-fantasy game? Yeah, there's an underserved market-segment screaming for attention.
Let us know when you come up with a good, yet innovative, game and get it published.
Very Interested!
I really dig the Diamond Throne/Arcana Evolved stuff he did. It was very creative and full of great ideas for adventure.
Monte didn't just work on 3e, he also worked on Rolemaster, and other things. I think a good game designer not only tries to invent for the sake of inventing, but also needs to consider their audience, the needs of the people who hired them, and the parameters of the game to be designed. Sure, it's probably more fun to start from scratch and create your masterpiece, but when someone hires you to create something, you have different constraints to work under.
I think this is going to be a fun game.
(aside: I am not a hatless cowpoke. I have a HAT!! I'm just not wearing it in this picture....)
I'll be keeping an eye on it and make my decision once the game is released. Living in the UK and soon in the middle east I don't see myself chipping in on a kick-starter (love pdf's but prefer paper).
Monte Cook needs to step down and just stop ruining RPGs.
Quote from: danbuter;569278Let us know when you come up with a good, yet innovative, game and get it published.
Yes, 'cause the only way I can be critical is to do it better myself first.
Really, that's the best you can come up with?
i think the 3 class bit works well with a science-fantasy vibe, like i could do phantasy star with something like that. if you're going the "classes" as opposed to "skills" (a.k.a. BRP) route, i mean.
i'll watch the production, but i'm burnt out on releases at the moment.
So far, I see nothing more than a D&D campaign setting and thus nothing that can't be done with old-school D&D. If he actually wants me to take seriously that this isn't such a thing, then he's got to bring his A-game and show me that this is actually worth the time and effort to learn the rules.
I also would prefer the concept art to be the final art. As to the setting...not my cup of tea. As to a new rules...please no, my brain is going to explode, I don't need any more rules. Thus, I'm very unlikely to buy this or pay it any further attention. But best of luck to him.
Monte is releasing a Dying Earth science fantasy setting?
Hmm...
Quote from: Black Vulmea;569257*yawn*
I don't get the Monte-adulation.
I wouldn't call it adulation as far as I'm concerned. As you might remember, I've been pretty vocal reading the Legends & Lore articles written by Monte and kept wondering "what the hell is wrong with him, for fuck's sakes?"
So I'm not giving a pass to the guy just because his name is Monte Cook.
Now that said, I do like a lot of his stuff. I liked the Might books, I liked Arcana Evolved, I love Ptolus to pieces, I liked McWoD, I liked CoC d20... Monte's great in terms of creating cool settings and fantasy, and tying that up to the game's mechanics - making setting and system work together, in other words. That's one of his strengths IMO. If he can pull off a setting that's full of adventuring opportunities, let's me interpret it the way I like with lots of stuff to play with and basically grabs me thinking "hey let's play this!", then I'll take a look at the system he's come up with.
If it's bland and doesn't grab my imagination, I'll just pass.
Quote from: Black Vulmea;569257And yet another sci-fantasy game? Yeah, there's an underserved market-segment screaming for attention.
Well to my own defense, AFAIC, the longest running sci-fi game I can think off that I GMed was my Hawkmoon/Stormbringer campaign that lasted approximately two years, and it was ages ago. I've liked the experiment we had with Traveller, I really like Stars Without Number, but I have not played a setting with quite the vibe he's presenting here for the last while, at least (Star Wars just doesn't count in my mind - it's fantasy throughout, from my POV).
Quote from: Benoist;569347So I'm not giving a pass to the guy just because his name is Monte Cook.
No, I'm sure you're not, but around the 'webz, that's the vibe coming from quite a few of the posters I read.
Quote from: Benoist;569347Now that said, I do like a lot of his stuff.
I liked
Ghostwalk as a setting. The rules for ghosts were complete shite, however.
Everything else of his that I can remember was resoundingly meh.
Quote from: Black Vulmea;569351I liked Ghostwalk as a setting. The rules for ghosts were complete shite, however.
Oh yes! I loved Ghostwalk too. I used the rules in actual play in my Arcana Evolved game (a PC died and became a Ghost), and it worked great, with a few adjustments (most notably I came up with the idea of soulstones which are like ghost-prone landmarks in the dungeon that work like small Manifest wards of sorts, so you have areas where Ghosts are substantial, and others not, etc.).
Quote from: Black Vulmea;569351I liked Ghostwalk as a setting. The rules for ghosts were complete shite, however.
sean k. reynolds was co-writer for that one, so not sure how much appreciation/blame to spread around, there ;)
Quote from: Benoist;569352I used the rules in actual play in my Arcana Evolved game (a PC died and became a Ghost), and it worked great . . .
Wait for it.
Quote from: Benoist;569352. . . with a few adjustments . . .
And . . . Oberoni!
;)
I wanted to run a d20
Modern/
Ghostwalk mashup, with Rome and its catacombs as Manifest. But I just didn't like the ghost rules at all.
Quote from: Black Vulmea;569356Wait for it.
And . . . Oberoni!
;)
Aww come on man. You know what I think about the "Oberoni" card. :D
Quote from: Black Vulmea;569356I wanted to run a d20 Modern/Ghostwalk mashup, with Rome and its catacombs as Manifest. But I just didn't like the ghost rules at all.
I've had an idea for a Roman fantasy AD&D setting for a while. I'd love to adapt the Ghostwalk rules for First Ed, actually. I'm not sure how I'd go about retrofitting the Ghost levels concept though... or if it's necessary to do so at all... hm.
Quote from: Benoist;569366Aww come on man. You know what I think about the "Oberoni" card. :D
;)
Quote from: Benoist;569366I've had an idea for a Roman fantasy AD&D setting for a while.
I was thinking of a modern game, rather than ancient Rome - all the world's religions would be having a sad to discover that Vatican City is the gateway to the afterlife.
Quote from: Black Vulmea;569351No, I'm sure you're not, but around the 'webz, that's the vibe coming from quite a few of the posters I read.
I liked Ghostwalk as a setting. The rules for ghosts were complete shite, however.
Everything else of his that I can remember was resoundingly meh.
Ptolus is a good setting. Well, I found it to be good; it fit my dm style and I did not need to make a lot of changes to it, and that's saying a lot.
Quote from: Bradford C. Walker;569332So far, I see nothing more than a D&D campaign setting and thus nothing that can't be done with old-school D&D. If he actually wants me to take seriously that this isn't such a thing, then he's got to bring his A-game and show me that this is actually worth the time and effort to learn the rules.
Unfortunately, the new rules I've seen are all narrative-based, so while the setting does seem cool, color me "prove this isn't TOR and MHR".
QuoteSo far, I see nothing more than a D&D campaign setting and thus nothing that can't be done with old-school D&D.
The thing is, if anyone was capable of capitalizing on all the dying earth metal hurlant weird science fantasy vibes churning about and marketing it to the Pathfinder crowd, I'd think it would be Monte, so it seems kinda weird that he's not doing that with this setting.
But I don't know anything about the PF business anyways.
Just seen the Kickstarter (http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1433901524/numenera-a-new-roleplaying-game-from-monte-cook)- aiming for the players book to be 64 pages long, with the core book at LEAST 300 pages long - that's a lot of setting and GM stuff.
With so little of the mechanics on show so far, at this stage funding is a hellish leap of faith for a game that's got a year to go before release. And it's half-funded already !
Quote from: Ladybird;569226No, it sounds like a game with mechanics that would force me out of character immersion...
You play diceless freeform too? Dice are so distracting with that clitter-clatter sound and all. And just having to think about rolling them harshes my thespian vibes.
As far as Numenera goes, I think it looks neat and I certainly want to see more of it. I really don't have an opinion of Monte Cook one way or the other since I totally missed the big 3rd Edition era but it looks like he knows how to get things done.
kickstater has already beat the goal. wonder how much over it will end up, with over 30 days left to go?
Numenera?
Numeria?
Quote from: Planet Algol;569870Numenera?
Numeria?
Nom-nom-nom-nom-nom!
One is a fantasy setting with futuristic technology the other is a fantasy setting with futuristic technology.
Quote from: Planet Algol;569886One is a fantasy setting with futuristic technology the other is a fantasy setting with futuristic technology.
Well, that clears it right up, then.
One is for a game with a 300+ page corebook the other is for a game with a 300+ page corebook...
Quote from: Planet Algol;569890One is for a game with a 300+ page corebook the other is for a game with a 300+ page corebook...
Even better.
Quote from: Planet Algol;569890One is for a game with a 300+ page corebook the other is for a game with a 300+ page corebook...
Which of those are Stars without Numeneras?
And the kickstater is now almost at 50k, with 38 days to go. So apparently the MC-fans who didn't care sh*t for his venture into LotFP
were waiting for his own new system/game.
wouldn't be at all surprised if it beats all the stretch goals he's laid out so far.
Quote from: DKChannelBoredom;570023And the kickstater is now almost at 50k, with 38 days to go. So apparently the MC-fans who didn't care sh*t for his venture into LotFP were waiting for his own new system/game.
I have the Kicktraq extension for Chrome. As of right now, its "Trending" line is set at $1,062,500. Trending means that's what it would hit if its funding continued to rise at the same rate as it did during the previous day. In reality, KS's tend to have their biggest spikes near the beginning and end of their run, with steady, but much lower, increases during the long middle period. But it's still interesting to see what the Trending line is and how it changes over the course of a KS. [an example of one that stayed mostly constant was the OUYA KS, with the trending line almost always at about $8 million something, and the final day's spike actually caused it to beat the trending line projection by a little.]
Monte Cook only has stretch goals through $100k, so if it ends up doing much better than that I'm curious to see what else he might add.
I've enjoyed everything Cook has done. So count me in.
I'll definitely be checking this out.
Quote from: beeber;569191the xp-as-resource (http://www.numenera.com/game-play/) thing sounds neat.
That's the ONE thing that turned me off. I don't like those sorts of trade-offs.
Quote from: Caesar Slaad;570194That's the ONE thing that turned me off. I don't like those sorts of trade-offs.
This. d6 SWRPG choked on it, TORG did, HG/JC/T8 did, etc. because there is never any reason to spend XP on anything other than character progression unless your guy is certain to die otherwise.
Im on the fence about that rule myself as given he has nearly a year yet before release he may well alter or even completely change that rule in playtesting.
Quote from: DKChannelBoredom;569175So now Monte has announced his upcoming new rpg: Numenera (http://www.montecookgames.com/announcing-numenera/) - Sci-Fi, Kickstarter, new system, easy to gm, lots to discuss but is anyone interested in what MC's got to offer anymore?
Hmmm.... A billion years divided by eight is 125 million years for each great civilization? Or roughly a billion years have gone by since any of these great civs existed and all eight of them are just now discovered?
I'll be interested if it is at all like New Sun.
Quote from: GeekEclectic;570111I have the Kicktraq extension for Chrome. As of right now, its "Trending" line is set at $1,062,500.
Sounds about right, but from what I've seen Kicktraq estimates are a bit on the
conservative end.
Quote from: Black Vulmea;569257*yawn*
I don't get the Monte-adulation.
It's a Kickstarter. Fanboys will gather around it like moths.
Im gonna throw down abit of cash towards this kickstarter. It'll be my first time doing this but everything ive read so far has made me really want to see this game succeed, and it's been a long time since we've seen a decent looking Science Fantasy game that was'nt just a licenced property adapted to D20 or some other system(usually badly) .
Between now and a billion years from now, dinosaurs could make a comeback and become extinct again several times. And so could auto unions. So my question is, will there be dinosaur/auto hybrids in the game that players can generate and roleplay?
If not i fully intend to make some coz that sounds like a cool idea! :)
Quote from: Broken-Serenity;570378If not i fully intend to make some coz that sounds like a cool idea! :)
See, that's the kind of thinking I like to see. :)
Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;570361It's a Kickstarter. Fanboys will gather around it like moths.
I've been impressed with Cook's work since Dark Space. Which is more longevity than most game designers have. He hasn't ever disappointed me. Where better to dedicate my money? Spend it on a game designers I *don't* respect?
Quote from: Tetsubo;570403I've been impressed with Cook's work since Dark Space.
You're a perfect customer for Kickstarter then.
Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;570361It's a Kickstarter. Fanboys will gather around it like moths.
This is probably sort of true, but just less than a month ago, Monte couldn't raise 6K for his part of the Lamentations of the Flame Princess campaign (http://lotfp.blogspot.dk/2012/08/recap-and-analysis-adventure-campaigns.html); actually it din't reach more than 1600$. That's probably what this new project received in its first hour.
So it looks like most fanboys still looks beyond the name on the cover.
It sounds like a very exciting project. I've been a big fan of Monte and everything he's written. I have complete confidence that Numenera will be a good solid system!
Quote from: Sean !;569209It's a question of timing and confidence - he knows Numenera will be seen as his reaction to working on 5e so he's bound to go all out to make the game count. He's making all the right noises e.g. intuitive simplicity of design, the symbiosis of rules and setting. He makes good choices - checkout the art on the website.
There's a narrowing window of opportunity (even for a 'name' designer) before the Kickstarter glut bloats out and projects start getting lost in the constant buzz, so I hope he succeeds on KS.
Well he won't have to work too hard considering from what I see of 5E so far - it's gonna fall flat on its ass.
Quote from: flyingcircus;572088Well he won't have to work too hard considering from what I see of 5E so far - it's gonna fall flat on its ass.
at the very least, it'll miss whatever sales targets hasbro sets, IMO
Quote from: beeber;572102at the very least, it'll miss whatever sales targets hasbro sets, IMO
Ain't that the truth.
Quote from: beeber;572102at the very least, it'll miss whatever sales targets hasbro sets, IMO
What it actually needs to do is be a marked improvement, sales-wise, over 4e.
Actually, more accurately, the overall strategy of WoTC now has to be a marked improvement, sales-wise, over the 4e period. If the combo of "5e + reprints + PDFs available + good public relations + whatever other trick they have up their sleeve" beats out the old model of "4e + semi-functioning online project + no PDFs + scare or insult away 2/3rds of their customer base", then they'll be good.
RPGPundit
the reprints seem to have won over a small segment of the OSR type folks. since my 1e stuff is still in good to decent shape, they're irrelevant to me. the only "good PR" to sway one like myself would be the PDFs, no subscription required--and i wonder if that will be the case or not, honestly.
but the amount of dinero i'd be sending WotC is minimal anyway. i'm certainly not their target audience.
Quote from: RPGPundit;573092Actually, more accurately, the overall strategy of WoTC now has to be a marked improvement, sales-wise, over the 4e period. If the combo of "5e + reprints + PDFs available + good public relations + whatever other trick they have up their sleeve" beats out the old model of "4e + semi-functioning online project + no PDFs + scare or insult away 2/3rds of their customer base", then they'll be good.
The big question is whether those reprints and PDF releases will provide a better return than the online subscription - their costs will be minimal, but there will probably be a large spike in initial sales with a sharp decline afterwards, versus the relatively stable (In both costs and sales) online tools, but with far larger up-front costs.
Let's see how it goes. I think they'd be leaving money on the table if they don't offer some form of subscription service, and hopefully they'll do it properly this time. They'll have learnt a lot about the 4e publication model, what worked and what didn't, and 5e's publication model will be very strongly influenced by those lessons.
But they won't repeat the "3e was never fun, please ignore the fact that the common factor in every 3e game - that was never fun, remember - was the ruleset we published".