|
Bossko B.
England
Brierley Hill
The Black Country
BAZINGA!
-
wavemotion wrote: E Decker wrote: SJBenoist wrote: The basic CCG principles actually don't work very well at all, which is why the failure rate for CCGs is over 90%.
Virtually every "collectable" game has collapsed, even moving beyond card games and into mini's (or Clix). In total, I'd imagine I could name at least 5 games that failed for every game that lasted more than 2 years. Why would we expect this to be a success when the vast majority fail? Well, to be fair, there were about 5 crappy CCGs for every good one.  I think you're being unfair here. There were about 8 crappy CCGs for every good one. Dave
Hey, there's an idea. They could have a Collectable RPG. You pay $40 for a random RPG book. 30 to collect! 
Wait... this is WOTC. I woudn't put it past them. 
-
-
wavemotion wrote: E Decker wrote: SJBenoist wrote: The basic CCG principles actually don't work very well at all, which is why the failure rate for CCGs is over 90%.
Virtually every "collectable" game has collapsed, even moving beyond card games and into mini's (or Clix). In total, I'd imagine I could name at least 5 games that failed for every game that lasted more than 2 years. Why would we expect this to be a success when the vast majority fail? Well, to be fair, there were about 5 crappy CCGs for every good one. I think you're being unfair here. There were about 8 crappy CCGs for every good one. Dave
I stand corrected. 
On a side note, I think this is interesting because since so many of the collectible games that failed were either truly awful, trying to ride Magic's coattails without any thought for actual game design, or failed for unrelated reasons such as large-scale embezzling, it's really hard to say much about the collectible format's merits as a marketing model.
But anyway, that's just an aside. I really, really hope this has nothing whatsoever to do with the discussion at hand.
-
Ryan Shellito
United States
New York
New York
I live in Manhatten, The City of Pizza!
Ia! Ia! Shub-Niggurath! The Black Goat of the Woods with a Thousand Young!
-
Ugavine wrote:
Hey, there's an idea. They could have a Collectable RPG. You pay $40 for a random RPG book. 30 to collect! :p
Wait... this is WOTC. I woudn't put it past them. :what:
I worked at a game store when 3.0 was released. Before the release there were persistent rumors that WoTC was going to release 3.0 as a three ring binder and the pages would be sold in blind packs with varying levels of rarity for pages from certain sections.
-
Eric M. Aldrich I
United States
California
-
Badger242 wrote: Ugavine wrote: Hey, there's an idea. They could have a Collectable RPG. You pay $40 for a random RPG book. 30 to collect! Wait... this is WOTC. I woudn't put it past them. I worked at a game store when 3.0 was released. Before the release there were persistent rumors that WoTC was going to release 3.0 as a three ring binder and the pages would be sold in blind packs with varying levels of rarity for pages from certain sections.
Yes, I remember those jokes. I don't think any of us took it seriously though.
-
Freelance Police
United States
Palo Alto
California
-
The D&D supplements *are* modular. It was up to your gaming group whether or not you could play such-and-such supplement. OTOH, Supplements were mostly character-based, so changing the *system* (eg. so that some groups could have shorter combat) hasn't really been done yet.
But it has been tried. With d20, Swords and Sorcery (?) released War, which added mass combat rules to D&D. 3e has some sort of supplement for mass combat so they could tie in the D&D boardgame with their D&D mini's line. And AD&D had its long lost BattleSystem rules.
As for "exact same product", I disagree. Another BGG'er said that D&D was a unique rpg in that it's *the* gateway game for the RPG industry. As a result, it needs to appeal to the target audience of new customers -- and this is a moving target. I'll say that 4e *was* a good edition -- it tapped into the MORPGer, and the boardgamers, two gamer audiences who certainly spend a lot of money on games.
-
Jamie Herbert
United States
Cedar Rapids
Ia
-
Which is one problem I had with my last D&D campaign (3.5) I had a magic player who believed the rules were like magic cards in the "I own the rules, I can use them" and kept creating pc's with supplements I did not own, and it used to piss me off something fierce, He did not have the Eberron (the campaign world I was using) so he could not make the special races from it but he could play a psychic ninja, because he had a fighter splat book. if this is what 5e is I'm clinging to Pathfinder for dear life.
-
Samuel Sol
Brazil
São Paulo
SP
All engines full to awesome land!
*tap* *tap* Is this thing on?
-
Sam and Max wrote: The D&D supplements *are* modular. It was up to your gaming group whether or not you could play such-and-such supplement.
But they are not small. A sourcebook has so much in it, that except for things like Arcana Unearthed, you either add a lot or nothing at all. As for what we are calling modular, these would be 20-30 pages books, mostly like the early Defenders of the Faith: A Guidebook to Clerics and Paladins and its ilk.
-
-
It's not a horrible idea, there are games that do that well. Stuff like Dungeon World. It's fairly easy to add a character class to that game.
I'm just not sure WotC could pull it off. Games that have that aspect usually only have a few extra 'modules'. You'll see a minimum of one a month if WotC goes that route.
Also if it happens don't be surprised to see WotC push an 'it's all legal' rather than 'the group picks' model. They want players to buy that stuff and bring it to the table, they don't want DMs restricting the amount of material.
99% of the problems WotC does, and will, have with any edition of D&D is that they're a subsidiary of Hasbro :/
-
Freelance Police
United States
Palo Alto
California
-
DR Evil wrote: Which is one problem I had with my last D&D campaign (3.5) I had a magic player who believed the rules were like magic cards in the "I own the rules, I can use them" and kept creating pc's with supplements I did not own, and it used to piss me off something fierce, He did not have the Eberron (the campaign world I was using) so he could not make the special races from it but he could play a psychic ninja, because he had a fighter splat book. if this is what 5e is I'm clinging to Pathfinder for dear life.
That's when you punch him in the mouth. Er... When the amorphous "group chemistry" comes in. If a guy doesn't fit your gaming group, particularly your roleplaying game group, then eject him.
Yes, easier said than done. Play Paranoia. *Then* punch him in the mouth.
-
Freelance Police
United States
Palo Alto
California
-
yohanleafheart wrote:
Well... IIRC, When a player drags along a sourcebook, they're only using the whatever pages that apply to their character, not the entire book. And, when a GM does the same, he's only really using the few pages relevant to whatever the party's doing at the moment. That is, characters and settings need whole books, rules changes don't.
In less garbledese, I'd imagine that the additional modules would be a chapter in a book, not whole books themselves. IIRC, 2nd edition used those blue gutter layouts for optional rules. They didn't need sourcebooks.
Then again, the riduculous number of Player Handbooks, Monster Manuals, and even Dungeonmaster Guides, plus the Essentials books, may be telling WotC they *can* get away with selling "not small" sourcebooks to the 5e crowd.
Won't know until the books come out. All I'm saying is that what they're doing now isn't as ground-shaking as the press release suggests.
-
Freelance Police
United States
Palo Alto
California
-
Ugavine wrote: Hey, there's an idea. They could have a Collectable RPG. You pay $40 for a random RPG book. 30 to collect!
That would describe the days of third-party OGL sourcebooks!
My retailer *did* have some RPG customers who bought "one of everything" when d20/OGL just came out. They changed their minds.
-
|
|
|
