WFRP, D20, and Ryan Dancey

[RPGPundit]

Over at Gamingreport.com, Ryan Dancey posted a fairly reasonable review of the new Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay.  Naturally, the result of this is massive outcry from the swine at any and all angles.   It is the triple crown of swine-issues.  The neopolitan ice-cream of hate. The hattrick of petty spite.
 
The Swine HATE Ryan Dancey.  They hate him because he more than anyone was responsible for D20. For the system that brought them down, that destroyed their story-based empire. They hate him too because he is one of the few people in the gaming industry today that tends to have his head on straight. He usually calls it like it is on many a differing topic. D20 was one, story-based another, so was GAMA, and now this.  Naturally, the Swine take nothing but massive pride in any effort to destroy the guy.
 
And of course, the RPG.net swine hate D20. The reasons for this are many and already detailed. But I will note that in particular they hate the all-pervasive influence D20 has had on the market, an influence which tends to keep the Swine at bay, thwarting even their efforts to drag down games that aren't D20-based.
 
And then there's the Warhammer Swine.  They try to hold up WFRP as a game superior to other games, in particular D20. And will naturally despise anyone who dares to point out how much the second edition does in fact owe to D20.
 
And that is exactly what Ryan Dancey, bless him, set upon himself to do.  He must have known how predictable the result would be, surely?  He must have realized that what he was doing would be like sending a shipment of globes to the national convention of the Flat Earth Society?
 
Here is his review:
http://www.gamingreport.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=Reviews&file=index&req=showcontent&id=1747
 
Please note that Ryan gave WFRP2 four stars out of five, and generally was very positive about the game.
 
Here is 14 pages of the brain-fevered cretins over at RPG.net wailing and caterwauling in pure anti-ryan hate:
http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?t=211410&page=1&pp=10
 
Here is more of the same in the BI forums:
http://www.blackindustries.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=3860
 
So what exactly did Ryan Dancey do that has all of them shitting themselves? As usual, he told the truth.
 
He pointed out, quite correctly, that this new edition of WFRP owes much of its system to D20.  And there's nothing untrue about this.
 
There isn't a system that has come out since D20 that hasn't been affected by it, and anyone who wants to make a game up to industry standard had damn well better learn the lessons of D20 design.  Ryan was complimenting Chris Pramas in saying that Pramas has indeed learnt these lessons well.
 
It is in the differences from WFRP1 and WFRP2 that you find the pervasive and consistent influence of D20.  Changing the system to work with one single mechanic being the biggest of these.  There are others too, the mimicing of the skills/feats system for one. Changes to the combat systems would be another.
 
Ryan Dancey's unforgiveable crime is talking about this truth, with no qualms.  For writing a positive review, where he points out the inherent influence of D20 on the design of WFRP2, the swine start frothing at the mouth and demanding his head on a pike.
 
I hope Mr.Dancey sees these losers with the same jovial pleasure I do, their cries and hue are all the product of their defeat, their indignation really nothing but the foul stench of their failure.
 
And their failure is D20's victory. When games like Paranoia, WFRP, or Shadowrun all start bringing out new editions that apply the same basic standards that D20 is responsible for making standard, then you know that the good guys have won. Its one thing for there to be a lot of D20 games, but its quite another when non-D20 games start using D20 standards.
 
This is the surest reason for optimism in the gaming world.  The more the piggies at rpg.net squeal, the clearer it is that something is right in the world.

RPGPundit august 15 2005

[Imperator]

I agree only with some parts of the discourse here. Taking apart the usual antiSwine crazy rant of yours, there are some points I don't see clear:

I don't think that any game who wants to comply with industry standards must follow D20 lessons, mainly because I'm not sure that such standard exists. Actually, if such standard do exist I don't think that is a good idea to follow it, if you want to enjoy some success. Maybe your idea of industry standards is different from mine.

I also don't think that all systems after D20 are influenced by D20. D20 didn't bring anything new or non existant to gaming. It's a very traditional game, with very traditional mechanics, which is not a bad thing. But I can see many games that don't have anything to do with D20.

D20 didn't introduce the idea of a unified mechanic. AFAIK, that idea exists since RuneQuest, back in 1978. The skills in Warhammer work very much in the same (or very similar way) that they did in its 1st ed. I think that when you talk about mimicing of the skills/feat systems, you actually where thinking of the talents system. Well, it could seem that they are similar, but the Talents are also similar to the good old Merits in a bajillion systems before D20, so I don't see that point of yours (or Dancey). Actually, it would be easy to defend that Feats are inspired in other systems (including WHFRP skills, though I would also disagree) rather than the opposite.

I would agree in seeing some influence in combat system, specially in the action, half-action rules. But WFRP 2nd ed is a very similar game to the 1st ed, only more streamlined and better, so I would dispute Ryan Dancey's claim. Of course, reading Dancey's review one could come to the conclussion that most RPGs in the world are D20 derivatives, as most of them use dice, character sheets and stuff like that. But to each his own.

On the other hand, I don't understand the fury about what some dude said over the Internet. I can understand that you comment something funny about it, like Tetsujin28 did when he started the thread, but not the fury. I didn't understand with this, I didn't understand it when the brain damage thing, and I won't understand when any other guy on the web says something idiotic about the hobby and everyone feels threatened all of a sudden. Life.

[One Horse Town]

What i am beginning to find interesting, despite what WotC luminaries would have you believe, is that it seems as though recent WotC d20 or d&d releases seem to be aping the WFRP line.

I expect that there will be a refuting of this, but if you look at three books recently released by WotC, i think there are some startling similarities.

First off Mysteries of the Moonsea. A book that contains details on cities/towns as well as adventures that PCs can get involved in using that information. The Paths of the Damned adventures for WFRP did exactly that. To my knowledge, this book is a departure from the FR books normal format.

Monster Manual IV. This has example encounters, maps, ready stated NPCs and a 'knowledge chart' to determine what the PCs may know about the beastie. The WFRP bestiary has the well received 'in character' section that covers this same ground as the knowldege chart. I know this sort of thing has been done before, but the timing of such a departure from the 3.5 Monster Manual norm is mighty fishy.

DMG II. Although i haven't read this, from the report here, it holds info on starting and running a business. Something that has never been seen in a 3.5 WotC book before. The WFRP Old World Armoury had such rules. Hmm...

Perhaps the WFRP line is being more successful than WotC originally suspected and ideas are being brought over from that line?

It may be difficult for independants to come to a decision about this because of people being involved in those two lines posting here, but from my gamers standpoint, it's at least a mighty, mighty coincidence.

[Christmas Ape]

There isn't a system that has come out since D20 that hasn't been affected by it, and anyone who wants to make a game up to industry standard had damn well better learn the lessons of D20 design.

Wait, I've read this before. You left off "you're either deluded, or your favorite game sucks".

Please stop Forging up both sides of your insanely polarized world view. It'll make them easier to read and infinitely easier to begin to take seriously, if less amusing.

[kryyst]

What I don't get is why bother drudging up posts from RPG.net of all places that are well over a year old.

The points he bring up are pretty much well pointless.

It is in the differences from WFRP1 and WFRP2 that you find the pervasive and consistent influence of D20. Changing the system to work with one single mechanic being the biggest of these. There are others too, the mimicing of the skills/feats system for one. Changes to the combat systems would be another.

This is what I find to be the core flux of the argument and it's not true.  WFRP1 and WFRP2 play pretty much the same as they always have they've only scrapped the d6 in favor of a d10 when it comes to damage.  WFRP2 influences come from the same things WFRP1's fans have been commenting on from the beginning.  Streamline it remove the Naked Troll Syndrom and keep the game feeling the same.

There were always skills and feats in WFRP they went under different names but they were always there this is nothing new.   This whole argument is pretty much backwards.

WFRP2 does this it's development is on offshet of 2 decades of fans playing and working with WFRP1.  The production quality and overall presentation is perhaps owed to D20 and the fact that the market now is quite a bit different then it was 20 years ago.  D20 ups the bar in the book quality that's about it's greatest impace on WFRP2.

[Akrasia]

Why is this being posted again, a year later?  :confused:

Anyhow, one thing you fail to mention is that in the original review Dancy claimed that WFRP 2e was a 'derivative' of D&D 3e.

That claim is laughable.  And indeed, after much criticism of it, Dancy  himself revised his own review to remove that claim (into its current form).

... This is what I find to be the core flux of the argument and it's not true.  WFRP1 and WFRP2 play pretty much the same as they always have they've only scrapped the d6 in favor of a d10 when it comes to damage.  WFRP2 influences come from the same things WFRP1's fans have been commenting on from the beginning.  Streamline it remove the Naked Troll Syndrom and keep the game feeling the same.

There were always skills and feats in WFRP they went under different names but they were always there this is nothing new.   This whole argument is pretty much backwards.

Exactly.  The bulk of the hostility to Dancy's review was based on the fact that it was factually incorrect -- in other words, complete bullshit -- not an 'anti-d20' campaign by the 'Swine'.

[Caesar Slaad]

He must have realized that what he was doing would be like sending a shipment of globes to the national convention of the Flat Earth Society?

The euphemism I prefer here is "Went over like a reggae band at a KKK convention."

[RPGPundit]

What i am beginning to find interesting, despite what WotC luminaries would have you believe, is that it seems as though recent WotC d20 or d&d releases seem to be aping the WFRP line.

Not only do I agree with your point, I actually commented on this in my blog, and no less an authority than Mike Mearls tried to convince me that in fact Mysteries of the Moonsea had been planned out that way "since before WFRP was even released".  Somehow, I'm still skeptical; as I have been every time Mearls or other Wizards figures criticize WFRP or try to downplay it. It tells me WFRP makes the Wizards nervous. Which is very, very interesting.

That said, whether or not Wizards is ripping off the WFRP format in Moonsea and those other books (I haven't looked at MM4 so I couldn't comment on its similarities to the bestiary, but I think you might be stretching it just a bit with the DMGII, which didn't strike me as particularly WFRP-inspired) doesn't really have any effect on whether or not BI was inspired by D20's innovations in their choices of how to "update" WFRP 2e, which I think they clearly were.

And the point is, that's NOT a bad thing! The point is, they'd have been idiots NOT to learn from D20, just like Wizards would be idiots if they didn't learn from WFRP's subsequent successes.

RPGPundit

[RPGPundit]

Anyhow, one thing you fail to mention is that in the original review Dancy claimed that WFRP 2e was a 'derivative' of D&D 3e.

That claim is laughable.  And indeed, after much criticism of it, Dancy  himself revised his own review to remove that claim (into its current form).

I don't think he ever intended to use the word "derivative" in the sense that most people took it to mean, which is to say "ripping off". He revised the word, because the word itself was ill-thought-out, but didn't really change anything about his review.  So let's not make it sound as though he shifted his entire position either.

And no, I don't think that this is the only thing that the criticism was about.  I think that there is a pretty rabid contingent of WFRP-swine that despise D20 and felt offended that Dancey would dare to compare WFRP to D20, even though he did so in a way that was highly complimentary to WFRP.
Likewise, there were a shitload of people who don't give a fuck about WFRP, and have probably never played it in their lives, but who took advantage of the moment to shit on Ryan Dancey and attack D20, as usual.

So no, I don't think that if the word "derivative" had been omitted from the start it would have made any difference in how the swine would react to this.  The fact that he gave WFRP 4/5 stars didn't stop them; he could have given it 5/5 stars and they still would have shat on him. Because this was never about WFRP, or the review. It was about D20, and their hate for it.

RPGPundit

[One Horse Town]

I agree Pundit, it's not a bad thing by any stretch of the imagination. It is amusing seeing the change in WotC's books recently though.

I see that as a very nice nod that WFRP is causing shivers amongst the WotC heirachy. I wouldn't be surprised to see some kind of official denial soon. We shall see...

[RPGPundit]

Dude, there's already been "unofficial denial".  Mike Mearls has on a couple of different occasions made comments on my blog when I suggested such a thing, stating that Wizards was in no way influenced by WFRP.  He's also, on at least one occasion I can recall, downplayed the success of WFRP in his own blog, and publically stated that he doesn't care for it as a game.

Now, it could just be that Mike really doesn't like WFRP, and that this is a personal thing and not a job thing for him.  It also could be possible that he's telling the truth, as he sees it anyways, and not trying to be political for the "team".  On the whole I like and trust Mike, and generally willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. However, I remain fairly skeptical about any assertion that WFRP has had no impact on Wizards.  I think creatively it must have had an impact, and that from a business perspective they're probably actually breathing a huge sigh of relief that WFRP, while it has been very successful by "most RPGs" standards, has not ended up being successful enough that it is in any real sense a threat to Wizards/D&D.

RPGPundit

[One Horse Town]

Yep, true. It's been a big success, but not a big WotC type success. Yet...Wait till 40k comes out, then i reckon there will be shudders in the industry as a whole. It's absurdly popular and despite any reservations you or i may have on the merits of the publishing strategy of three game lines, it will sell very, very well.

[kryyst]

Too early to tell how big of a success it'll be and also in what measure.  The game has only been out for a little while by comparative standards.  The biggest limiter is that WFRP2 is a closed licence where as D20 is open.  So other then fan based Web stuff for WFRP you won't be seeing it use commercially anywhere else anytime soon by anyone that Games Workshop isn't in bed with.

[Akrasia]

...
Likewise, there were a shitload of people who don't give a fuck about WFRP, and have probably never played it in their lives, but who took advantage of the moment to shit on Ryan Dancey and attack D20, as usual...

I obviously cannot speak on behalf of everyone who criticised that review, or their motivations.  And frankly, I couldn't care less if a lot of people chose to leap on that review simply to express 'hate' for d20 and Dancey (I personally think Dancey is a complete tool -- as evidenced by his behaviour vis-a-vis GAMA -- but that's not the reason why  I think that the review is bullshit).

Many people who know the history of WFRP quite well, and who have no 'd20 hate', thought that the review was bullshit simply because it got the facts wrong.  Dancey claimed that many aspects of WFRP 2e were based on d20.  Most of the aspects he mentions in the review were not -- Dancey was wrong.  Sure there were a few d20-isms introduced into the game (the 'full action' and 'half action' stuff during combat is the only thing that I can think of off the top of my head), but for the most part the 'd20-isms' in WFRP 2e were already present (in some form) in WFRP 1e.

The review simply read like a craven attempt to inflate d20's influence on WFRP 2e.  Even people who like d20 and play it found this attempt both noxious and laughable.

Also, Dancey gave the Bestiary 2 stars because it 'wasted' so much space describing popular perceptions of the creatures in the Old World (i.e. 'fluff').  Talk about not understanding the subject matter he's reviewing ... :rolleyes:

[RPGPundit]

Yep, true. It's been a big success, but not a big WotC type success. Yet...Wait till 40k comes out, then i reckon there will be shudders in the industry as a whole. It's absurdly popular and despite any reservations you or i may have on the merits of the publishing strategy of three game lines, it will sell very, very well.

I doubt it. WH40K could have been the defining sci-fantasy RPG. It could have rocked the foundations of the gaming world. If it had been a single RPG.

As it is, the first of the three games will have big sales.  Then the people who bought it because it says WH40K will realize they've been sold less than 1/3rd of a roleplaying game, get pissed off, and that's the end of that.

If I was Mike Mearls I'd be having a small party right now, upon hearing of BI/Green Ronin's strategy for 40k; and breathing a huge sigh of relief.

RPGPundit