Quote from: kythri;601436So, some guy of zero relevance registered a trademark of questionable value, and got a couple of guys of whom their only relevance is "My dad invented D&D and let us play with him, and we have the same last name!" to trade on both the name and trademark?

Well, sign me up.

Actually, Luke G. is a gamer and pretty nice guy, and so are his sisters (pretty nice that is). Now whether he is good at making gaming stuff I don't know, but I do know they'd love to see their dad's legacy carried on, so I think they are earnest in wanting to make quality stuff for a new generation of gamers. I'm certainly willing to hope for their success, and even vote with my dollar if they make a decent showing. Why not capitalize on the names/trademarks if they can? WotC has certainly tried their best to. Nothing wrong with it.

Not to mention, the actual contributions of Ernie and Luke to D&D at its inception are real, in terms of spells (Tenser's Floating Disk, Cone of Cold, Melf's Acid Arrow, Minute Meteors etc) and various game components that came up in play and made it into the final game. Just saying that they were "allowed to sit at the table" is not an accurate depiction of their roles in the early years of D&D at all.

Quote from: Sigmund;601463Actually, Luke G. is a gamer and pretty nice guy, and so are his sisters (pretty nice that is).

I don't dispute that at all.

Quote from: Sigmund;601463Now whether he is good at making gaming stuff I don't know,

And that's my point.

Quote from: Sigmund;601463but I do know they'd love to see their dad's legacy carried on, so I think they are earnest in wanting to make quality stuff for a new generation of gamers. I'm certainly willing to hope for their success, and even vote with my dollar if they make a decent showing. Why not capitalize on the names/trademarks if they can? WotC has certainly tried their best to. Nothing wrong with it.

Nothing wrong with it at all.  Just not really interested.

Quote from: Benoist;601468Not to mention, the actual contributions of Ernie and Luke to D&D at its inception are real, in terms of spells (Tenser's Floating Disk, Cone of Cold, Melf's Acid Arrow, Minute Meteors etc) and various game components that came up in play and made it into the final game. Just saying that they were "allowed to sit at the table" is not an accurate depiction of their roles in the early years of D&D at all.

How much of that did they actually come up with, and how much of that was Gary, naming it after their characters?

Being an inspiration to a game, and actually being directly involved in the development and having the chops?  Not the same.

Quote from: kythri;601500How much of that did they actually come up with, and how much of that was Gary, naming it after their characters?

Being an inspiration to a game, and actually being directly involved in the development and having the chops?  Not the same.

Well judging by the interview I just watched of Luke Gygax explaining how they explored Castle Greyhawk and that fireballs backdrafted in 20x30 rooms and that from there he asked the DM (dad) "Would it be possible to craft a spell that would allow me to separate a fireball into beads or chunks to avoid the backdraft?", the DM answering "Well you'd have to research the spell, spend the gold, spend the time, but that might be possible", which he did, which lead to Melf's Minute Meteors, etc. I'd say that was an organic process.

You know. Like when you actually play games instead of talking about them?

It's like Mike Mornard was saying: "we came up with stuff we thought would be fun."

So yeah, seriously. Putting a line between the guys who sit at the table and play at the game's inception, calling their actual contributions to the game basically "nothing" or "meaningless" next to the DM of those games, the actual author of the finished thing, isn't accurate. It's not like they are the actual authors of the game, of course, but their contributions can't be denied/reduced to "nothing" either.

Coming up with a nice couple of spells falls a long way short of producing quality gaming material 30 years down the track.

All I really see here is a dude with some clever marketing moves who has the misfortune of being backed up by a Tim Kask who is STILL trying to live off the Gygax name.

People who mentioned Eldritch Enterprises got it spot on. I would not expect quality content from this venture.

Quote from: kythri;601499And that's my point.

And this is my point too. Neither you nor I know, but unlike you I'm not inclined to simply assume he can't do anything decent or useful for no other apparent reason than "just cuz". I'll let them try and then judge their actual efforts. Hopefully most other folks will as well.



 

QuoteJust not really interested.

Fair enough. There are plenty of threads about plenty of other topics here-bouts. Enjoy.

Quote from: Fiasco;601504Coming up with a nice couple of spells falls a long way short of producing quality gaming material 30 years down the track.

Sure, I'll agree we don't know what's going to happen.

I'm hopeful, personally.

Seriously, though,  a fucking magazine in 2013?

That's a bit like saying you're going to start up a top-notch horse and buggy company in 1913.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;601515Seriously, though,  a fucking magazine in 2013?

That's a bit like saying you're going to start up a top-notch horse and buggy company in 1913.

RPGPundit

LMAO.

"Hey guys, I have an idea. Let's jump on this fanzine thing that's all the rage!"

I'd be all over an actual, physical magazine dedicated to the games I play.

I've been in withdrawal ever since WotC pulled the plug on Dragon and Dungeon magazines, and drifted back into old school territory so Kobold didn't do it for me. If this magazine delivers, I'll be thrilled.

How many people were buying Dragon when they pulled the plug?

Quote from: Endless Flight;601523How many people were buying Dragon when they pulled the plug?

I have no idea. None whatsoever. I can't imagine it didn't sell at all, however, since well, Paizo was rightfully bummed when that happened, and WotC did it for a reason: to basically include Dragon into the DDI offerings so... they must have thought that doing so would pull in a significant amount of people, enough to justify the butthurt of Paizo fans, right?

Quote from: RPGPundit;601515Seriously, though,  a fucking magazine in 2013?

That's a bit like saying you're going to start up a top-notch horse and buggy company in 1913.

Well somebody been supplying those carriages in Central Park

I do agree with the sentiment, given today market starting up a magazine seems may not be the best route. In the end it boils down how the cost and time breaks out compared to the amount of sales. My opinion big problem isn't that a magazine can't be produced profitably for a niche market. But rather there are other way you can use that content for that offer more of a return.

Wouldn't it be more profitable to write up enough content for a 96-128 page book and sell it on RPGNow/Lulu for say $10 PDF/$20 B&W? Call it The Gygax Reader: Volume I and then release a new one every six months or some such?