Original blog article here. (http://web.mac.com/rsdancey/iWeb/RSDanceyBlog/Blog/812CB3D6-444A-4295-B33C-90BCEABCDE8D.html)
Interesting opinions in there, like his view of boxed sets and books. What do you think?
He's perfectly correct. The fact that I didn't follow this advice proves that I'm an egotistical chump. :D
-clash
Quote from: flyingmiceHe's perfectly correct. The fact that I didn't follow this advice proves that I'm an egotistical chump. :D
-clash
I will state what I call him on the GIN..."Captain Obvious". If anything there was a surprises to folks...well, you should rethink getting into this gig. ;)
Bill
QuoteToday, what most designers want to do is make a world. They’re much, much more interested in being Ed Greenwood than in being Gary Gygax.
It's obvious why he would say that, but that doesn't make it any more accurate.
Quote from: HinterWeltI will state what I call him on the GIN..."Captain Obvious". If anything there was a surprises to folks...well, you should rethink getting into this gig. ;)
Bill
Hey, Bill! Congrats on your Colts! I told everyone the
real Super Bowl was Colts vs Pats, and I was right! Great game, and the best team won! Awesome game!
-clash
Luv ya but....
Fuck you and the Patriot bullshit horse you rode in on....
If/When the Pats get in the actual Super Bowl again - than you can say it's...ya know...the Super Bowl. Until then it's just a playoff game - chump...
And congrats to the Colts - one hell of a game.
Quote from: James J SkachLuv ya but....
Fuck you and the Patriot bullshit horse you rode in on....
If/When the Pats get in the actual Super Bowl again - than you can say it's...ya know...the Super Bowl. Until then it's just a playoff game - chump...
And congrats to the Colts - one hell of a game.
Why the hostility, James? If you want to rip into me for some reason, you should do it in Off Topic, though. We've diverted this thread enough.
-clash
As usual, Dancey hits the nail right on the head.
RPGPundit
Huh, I read that article a few days ago. What I got out of it was:
a) D20 can be anything you want it to be. Which I read as saying, effectively, if you take the SRD and systematically replace everything that you don't like, leaving the stuff you like, you'll have the game you want...and WotC will get to sell another Player's Manual even if it has next to nothing to do with your game.
In reality I think this is smarter than it appears at first, since by looking at D20 you can probably use it as a sort of "dummy testbed" for whatever systems you really care about, kind of a "lorem ipsum" for game design. But of course if you do this you may not need to tie your game to D20 or even OGL in the end.
b) Books are better than boxes. From a cost perspective this may be true. From a marketing perspective, I have doubts. What I mean is: I suspect there's a certain economy of design which is forced on you if you make a boxed product, and the latter also opens up the possibility of including components like boards, cards, and minis. All of which can help guide play and stimulate creativity for new players.
Look: How to Host a Mystery is not sold as a book.
QuoteBefore the concept of Open Gaming, publishers were forced to create new RPGs when they wanted to publish a game, at minimum because TSR did not license the Dungeons & Dragons game to any 3rd party. During those years, many people confused the need to make a new game with the value of making a new game. In fact, many of those games were actually pretty poorly designed. A designer with an idea for a certain effect like a different way to cast spells, or advance the power level of a character, or express super powers, or any number of other potential RPG mechanics might do a good job of creating a game system to do that thing, but when faced with the task of building all the other parts of an RPG, the designer often rushed the work, resulting in games with many flaws, omissions, and compromises.
This is something I've definitely observed about smaller games: homebrews/Forge games. They really tend to be one neat concept and everything else is either tacked on crudely, or shoehorned into the one nifty idea. Understandably, homebrew creators are focused on the bits they find interesting and gloss over the stuff they find unimportant.
QuoteMake your product a book, not a box. There are good reasons that the industry stopped making boxed games (the biggest reason is that half the RPG business is now in bookstores, and they dislike boxed sets intensely. Boxes crush, shrinkwrap rips, and boxes don't fit their shelves as neatly as standard size book products do.
A lot of gamers like boxes. At the very least, it can keep a new gamer from having to figure out where to buy dice. WotC obviously sees the advantage of boxes as well with the D&D Basic Set, and Player's Kit. Ultimately, this is one of those statements that says, "We know that customers will buy box sets, but the distibutors and bookstores have more say in what is sold than what customder demmand does."
Thanks for the link. Some interesting comments.
I'm not using the d20 system because the gameplay will be different from d20. It's not just a different setting.
I'm more interested in following in Gary's footsteps than Ed's. ;)
"If you want to design a roleplaying game, you should use d20."
Er, thanks Mr Dancey. That was terribly helpful.
That's not what he said.
Yes it is. He says that if you write a roleplaying game, then it's probably fucked and stupid and a mess, unless you write it with many contributors over some years. As an example of an rpg written by just one person, he gives SenZar - not exactly being balanced about the idea of a sole authour.
Quote from: Ryan DanceyThe games that created and sustained successful player networks like Storyteller and Hero evolved over many years, and had many contributors. Some of those people belonged to a cadre of designers who grew up together and stayed in close contact as their careers took them through several publishers, and they cross pollinated ideas from game to game, and built a large reservoir of knowledge about what was working and what was not working.
He then goes on to say that you're too stupid and ignorant to be able to write your own game and have it be any good. So you should use d20.
Quote from: Ryan DanceyBefore you assume that you can design a game as good as those people, especially without a thorough grounding in statistics, probability theory, gamer demographics, a good grounding in how to template rules text, and a hundred other niche fields of study uniquely applicable to RPG design, take a while to consider if it would make more sense to use an off-the-shelf system like D20, which comes with very few strings attached.
He goes on to discuss the reasons not to use d20, which boil down to, "if you're going to make a game no-one will like." A game without conflicts, etc - given the context of other stuff he's said, that means, "a game no-one will like."
He then goes on to say that most rpg writers are most keen on setting design, rather than game design, and only design a system to support that setting. He says that most of the settings are best supported by d20.
Quote from: Ryan DanceyFor most world concepts I see [...] D20 is not only a good option, it is almost certainly the best option.
He then goes on to give more specific advice, like "no boxed sets, only books," and "put your efforts into the core books", which boils down to, "do it just like we did d20."
So we can boil his whole post down to,
"If you want to design a roleplaying game, you should use d20.":shrug:
There are some fiddly bits and all the appropriate caveats in there, but that's what it all boils down to. He wants people to make more d20 splatbooks. He wants to suport the policy of WotC making the profitable corebooks, while smallfry make the unprofitable splatbooks. It's a brilliant marketing policy, the OGL, absolutely brilliant. It's long been a problem for rpg companies that everyone who plays the game buys the corebooks, but not everyone buys the splatbooks, but when spatbooks are released, corebook sales go up; so how do you make sure the corebook sales make enough money to cover the losses on the splatbooks? WotC's answer: get some other guys to take the losses on the splatbooks, leaving WotC with only the profits on the corebooks. Awesome!
It's a brilliant and admirable marketing plan, that OGL.
Don't get what the big deal is. He's right. Most folks like d20 and if you want to be successful, there's a higher chance you will be if you use d20 and some(if not all) of his suggestions.
I seem to like games that nobody seems to play in large numbers. I wish this wasn't the case, not because I can't find people to game with, but because I find I have very little in common, with most of the folks who post on message boards - this is really not a big problem though :D .
Regards,
David R
Hey, I didn't say he was wrong about d20 helping your game be successful.
But it depends on what your aims with your game are. If you just want to make money, in the first place forget about rpgs, but if you're stuck on them, then you should do a shitload of ten page d20 pdfs.
But if you have some particular ideas you want to see in print and share with people, then d20 might help you, it might not, depends on the ideas.
I also reject the idea that if a game's written by one person, it must be crap.
Quote from: JimBobOzHey, I didn't say he was wrong about d20 helping your game be successful.
But it depends on what your aims with your game are. If you just want to make money, in the first place forget about rpgs, but if you're stuck on them, then you should do a shitload of ten page d20 pdfs.
But if you have some particular ideas you want to see in print and share with people, then d20 might help you, it might not, depends on the ideas.
I also reject the idea that if a game's written by one person, it must be crap.
I was not commenting on anything you wrote*, Jimbob. Just, that I suspect this will turn into a
RyanD sucks thread. Just thought I'd throw in my opinion, before all the drama...:D
*Most of which I agree with BTW.
Regards,
David R
It reminds me a bit of the various editions of Monopoly that come out. Simpsons Monopoly. Star Wars Monopoly. Welcome Back Kotter Monopoly. From a business point of view, this works. I bet if you went to a book/toy store right now you'd find at least 2 variant versions of monopoly there. Maybe more. And new versions are coming out all the time.
But are they different games? Or is it the same game with some different fluff attached to it.
If you're more interested in setting, like Ed Greenwood, then d20 *is* a good choice. If you're more interested in making a different *game* then it has to actually be different. It can't be Monopoly: Steampunk edition. ;)
Quote from: JimBobOzBut it depends on what your aims with your game are. If you just want to make money, in the first place forget about rpgs, but if you're stuck on them, then you should do a shitload of ten page d20 pdfs.
Then why are you giving him shit for allegedly espousing your own ideas? Or did you miss where he said:
QuoteIf you want to make an RPG just to prove to yourself that you can, and you don't really care if anyone other than a few friends ever plays the game, or you want to create art for the sake of art, the rest of this essay probably isn't for you.
On the other hand, if you want to publish an RPG commercially for sale in the US (and possibly Europe), you'll probably find these comments of interest, especially if you want to publish a book product for sale through the traditional 3-tier distribution system (publishers, distributors, and local game stores).
Because he's lying about that as well.
Please name the companies, and numbers people employed full-time, outside Wizards of the Coast, who make their entire income from producing d20 books.
Choosing to have a non-d20 game book, and a d20 game book, if you're not part of Wizards or other "big" company - it's just a matter of choosing whether you want a grand's pocket money each year, or a few grand's.
Be original, make a thousand bucks*; go d20, make two thousand bucks*. That's what it is for the majority of people writing their own rpgs. He's presenting it as though it's "commercial failure and bankruptcy" versus "stunning success and living in the Caribbean snorting coke off hookers' arses." It simply ain't so.
* If you're lucky, and smart.
** If you're lucky, and smart.
Quote from: flyingmiceHey, Bill! Congrats on your Colts! I told everyone the real Super Bowl was Colts vs Pats, and I was right! Great game, and the best team won! Awesome game!
-clash
Psst! Clash! The Horsies are MY team! (Hometown Hoosier right here!) And yeah, that was the SB. What a rivalry!
Anyhow back to Dancey: seems a bit down on small-press publishing in general, doesn't he? The little check boxes at the bottom aren't bad for someone looking to be a "full-time RPG professional", but nothing too earth-shattering.
I liked this comment at the bottom:
Quote from: RyanDAnyone who knows my record knows that I have more than enough credentials & credits to express opinions on RPG/CCG design & theory.
:rollbarf:
Didn't know there were prerequisites for that, Ryan.
I read the article and was largely unimpressed. While I found myself agreeing with his more obvious points, he came away sounding a bit like one of those inspirational seminar gurus you catch on paid advertisements lat at night. Two things to remember about Ryan Dancey.
1) He's selling the product on which he's staked his career.
2) He's promoting his own reputation.
I'm not saying he should be distrusted because of these two points, but bear in mind that he has a vested interest in selling you his vision, even to the detriment of other options. His comments on his blog came as no surprise.
!i!
Quote from: JimBobOz"If you want to design a roleplaying game, you should use d20." unless you have a really good reason
FIFY
If it wasn't for the OGL, I wouldn't be writing for RPG's. It's as simple as that. d20's flaws are legion, but it's here, it's free, it's popular and if you don't like something you can fix it. It's the Open Software model all over again
And if what you are writing is good enough, people will buy it even if they don't use d20, strip out the ideas and stick them in another system
Writing a new game system ain't that easy and (unless you have a model of play that the OGL doesn't support) your time is probably better spent elsewhere - unless you are confident you know how to write the next Runequest
Good point Hastur, and a very true one.
Eh. D20 is basically overrated unless you intend to stick pretty close to the original. Too many in-built assumptions and structures, that aren't necessarily going to offer what you want without a shit ton of changes if you're deviating too far from "stock fantasy".
The way I figure it, if I'm having to spend as much effort tweaking a system as I would to just make a new one, then I don't need to be wasting my time. If by the time I'm done I'm going to have something only barely recognizable as the original anyway then I'm no longer banking on the brand name either.
Plus, the amount of tedium involved in working with d20 in particular made my brain hurt. I didn't really want to have to deal with trying to part out where the changes were and what was open content and what wasn't and reprinting or reexplaining half of someone elses work just so I could make sense of this change over here.
I found there's a lot more work that goes into making a full game with D20 than folks like Ryan like to suggest, and I'd rather go from scratch.
Conversely, with FUDGE, I found that there was so little there that I was basically again designing a whole system from scratch, with the only common thread a die mechanic that I didn't even like.
Once he gets done shilling for D20 though, the little checklist towards the end of the post has some good points.
You really want to know what to do if you want to write an RPG? First you answer these two questions:
1. What do you do?
2. How do you do it?
You can't answer either of those questions, you're screwed.
Quote from: David RDon't get what the big deal is. He's right. Most folks like d20 and if you want to be successful, there's a higher chance you will be if you use d20 and some(if not all) of his suggestions.
David R
Thats not true everywhere. It helps that you do have the qualifier "most" on there.
Its not that "most Folks"
like D20 - in some cases thats all they know because that game mechanic is coupled with the 800 pound gorilla name of
Dungeons & Dragons.
There are
other "generic" or universal games out there. Examples : SAVAGE WORLDS, the HERO system and GURPS come to mind right off the bat.
- E.W. Charlton
Quote from: KoltarThats not true everywhere. It helps that you do have the qualifier "most" on there.
Its not that "most Folks" like D20 - in some cases thats all they know because that game mechanic is coupled with the 800 pound gorilla name of Dungeons & Dragons.
There are other "generic" or universal games out there. Examples : SAVAGE WORLDS, the HERO system and GURPS come to mind right off the bat.
No, really, most folks prefer d20 because it's the system they know from D&D and they don't want nothing to do with learning how to play the game again.
Quote from: Bradford C. WalkerNo, really, most folks prefer d20 because it's the system they know from D&D and they don't want nothing to do with learning how to play the game again.
I enjoy D20, don't get me wrong by my rant. I don't think it's right for everything, and I think it's important to try new things. you just may find something you like even better.
But Brad's right. Most people, as in, a good 75% or more of the market, do in fact, prefer D20. On the most absolute, literal, statisical leve, it is an undeniable truth of the roleplaying hobby that most people simply play D&D.
Pretending otherwises suggests a disconnection from the reality of the gaming world, though one that, for internet savvy gamers, is very common.
A lot of folks who spend too much time on the Internet have an unfortunate tendency to believe that the tastes of the general public actually coincide with whatever their little community thinks is important.
It doesn't.
It may be true that 75% of the roleplaying market is d20 & D&D, but that does not mean that the remaining 25% is actually 0%. 25% is pretty significant. I think that most roleplaying game companies would be quite happy at getting 25% of the market ;) Certainly it's unlikely that any one book will get that 25%, but...
The reality is that there is no rpg book which everyone will buy, you just try to create one that a substantial number of people will buy, "substantial" being a word relative to your aims - whether you want to make a living, or just get some pocket money, or just have some idea you want to spread around.
If you want to make a living selling rpg stuff, then it's definitely a good idea to go for d20. But that's not the aim of most game designers, they just want pocket money or have a few ideas they want to share. Ryan Dancey may say, "well, how many non-d20 writers are making a living from it?" And I would answer with, "how many d20 writers are making a living from it?" The answer, in both cases, must be, "fucking close to none at all."
Quote from: J ArcaneI didn't really want to have to deal with trying to part out where the changes were and what was open content and what wasn't and reprinting or reexplaining half of someone elses work just so I could make sense of this change over here.
The best way to avoid that is not to own a copy of the Players Handbook or the d20 Modern Corebook :D
Quote from: Bradford C. WalkerNo, really, most folks prefer d20 because it's the system they know from D&D and they don't want nothing to do with learning how to play the game again.
Also...not everybody
starts with D&D.
At the store I work at , plenty of people had their first RPG experience with
RIFTs or
World of Darkness.
We even have a few who started gaming with
WARHAMMER Fantasy Roleplaying or
Hackmaster.
Ryan Dancey just seems more than a tad arrogant in that article.
- E.W.C.
Quote from: KoltarRyan Dancey just seems more than a tad arrogant in that article.
Like I said previously, he sounds like one of those inspirational self-empowerment speakers. He's selling you
his program for success, and his program makes
him money. He's not exactly being objective in his article.
!i!
Quote from: Elliot Wilena) D20 can be anything you want it to be. Which I read as saying, effectively, if you take the SRD and systematically replace everything that you don't like, leaving the stuff you like, you'll have the game you want...and WotC will get to sell another Player's Manual even if it has next to nothing to do with your game.
In reality I think this is smarter than it appears at first, since by looking at D20 you can probably use it as a sort of "dummy testbed" for whatever systems you really care about, kind of a "lorem ipsum" for game design. But of course if you do this you may not need to tie your game to D20 or even OGL in the end.
Agreed. In particular, look at what Dancey says here:
Quote from: Ryan DanceyYou feel that Hit Points, Armor Class, Vancian spellcasting, classes, levels, etc. restrict or limit, or in some other way restrict you from expressing your "vision" (all those things are designer options, not features of the system, and can be discarded, modified, or ignored once you understand how to use the whole D20 toolbox).
Let's imagine a game where we've junked hit points, AC, vancian spellcasting, classes and levels. All that's left of D20 is the core resolution mechanic, skills and feats - and the skills and feats are going to need tweaking if you're dropping levels. By this point, reworking the SRD is going to be more work than just writing your own thing.
Quote from: JimBobOzYes it is. He says that if you write a roleplaying game, then it's probably fucked and stupid and a mess, unless you write it with many contributors over some years. As an example of an rpg written by just one person, he gives SenZar - not exactly being balanced about the idea of a sole authour.
Ryan Dancey is wrong when he links to
SenZar as an example of a 'poorly designed game'. He's so wrong that the phrase "utterly full of shit" springs to mind. In fact, I'll write it down so:
Ryan Dancey is utterly full of shit about SenZar.The game mechanics of
SenZar are rock fucking solid. I am not exaggerating when I say that if 3E hadn't come along I might very well be running
SenZar right now instead of
Eberron.
SenZar is a mechanically tight game about tripping on male adolescent power fantasies. Imagine playing in world designed around the covers of 80's metal albums.
The subject matter is dubious. The author have made asses of themselves on the internet. But anyone who says the game is a poor design is TALKING OUT HIS ASS.
Quote from: JimBobOz"If you want to design a roleplaying game, you should use d20."
Er, thanks Mr Dancey. That was terribly helpful.
why not he hasnt changed his tune since... 1999 or so when he declared thet everyone will bow down to d20
Quote from: WarthurLet's imagine a game where we've junked hit points, AC, vancian spellcasting, classes and levels. All that's left of D20 is the core resolution mechanic, skills and feats - and the skills and feats are going to need tweaking if you're dropping levels. By this point, reworking the SRD is going to be more work than just writing your own thing.
heck change the die type to a d10 and you have Interloc which powered Cyberpunk and Mekton
QuoteBecause he's lying about that as well.
QuoteIf you want to make a living selling rpg stuff, then it's definitely a good idea to go for d20.
Well, which is it? Is Dancey full of it when he says that making a living selling RPGs is easier via d20, or are you full of it when you say that making a living selling RPGs is easier via d20?
Quote from: James McMurrayWell, which is it? Is Dancey full of it when he says that making a living selling RPGs is easier via d20, or are you full of it when you say that making a living selling RPGs is easier via d20?
Frankly I tihnk people overestimate the success of 3rd party D20 products. WOTC is still the biggest seller for D20 products by an absolute landslide.
The success of 3rd party companies has been pretty comparable to that of non-d20 third party companies. Sticking the d20 logo on the back of your book is not a guarantee of greater success, that wave broke several years ago.
I would go so far as to suggest that thanks to the Atari-like glut of utter drek from companies like Mongoose, 3rd-party d20 products, and 3rd-party D&D products in particular have developed something of a stigma. EDIT: not only that but WOTC has the edge of being "official"/"canon", something no 3rd-party product can ever be.
And of the most successful 3rd-party d20 games, many of them are sufficiently distanced from the core mechanics that I question whether the d20 element had all that much to do with thier success.
Quote from: James McMurrayWell, which is it? Is Dancey full of it when he says that making a living selling RPGs is easier via d20, or are you full of it when you say that making a living selling RPGs is easier via d20?
Again with the old rush to extremes, the "fallacy of the excluded middle."
Ryan Dancey's talking about
making a living from producing roleplaying game books. That ain't the same as "making a grand or two", or "making money", as I called it. Let's set the lowest possible standard for "making a living" - equivalent to minimum wage working full-time.
Now, let's look at the people involved in writing rpgs, and in game companies, and ask ourselves, as I did earlier in the post you quoted from, what are the companies, and numbers of people employed full-time,
outside Wizards of the Coast, who make their
entire income from producing d20 books.
Now look at the numbers who make their entire income from producing non-d20 books.
By "entire income" I'm assuming that you'd want at least that "living" level - equivalent to minimum wage working full-time. It's not really much to boast about, "wow, this guy wrote for my game, and he made $500 that year - that was his whole income that year! He lives in his parents' basement. Man, my game is so successful, people make their whole income from writing for it! All five hundred bucks!"
The simple fact is that there's not a lot of money in rpgs. It's not likely you'll make a living from writing rpgs, d20 or not. The same goes for other kinds of writing, of course - novelists are not commonly millionaires, more often it's a hobby, or something they pursue for a couple of years before giving up due to financial pressures.
Whereas Dancey's presenting it as a sure bet. He's doing the old "fallacy of the excluded middle" himself.
Either you write non-d20 stuff, and it'll be crap and you'll end up broke,
or you write d20 stuff and you'll make a living. Fact is, most likely you won't make a living whatever you write.
Pump out a shitload of ten-page d20 pdfs, and you'll definitely make
some money. But you almost certainly won't make
a living. You won't make the equivalent of working full-time for minimum wage. d20 is no more likely to pay your bills than any other game system, including an original one. d20 is more likely to give you some pocket money, if you produce more or less decent products, and produce them in great quantities.
Just ask yourself - if it's so easy to make money writing d20 splatbooks, then why is there an OGL at all? Why would Wizards of the Coast so freely hand out the right for you to make oodles of money? Why wouldn't they just hire you as a freelancer instead? Could it be that really you're not likely to make a living from it, that for Wizards it'd be a money-losing proposition to produce
d20 101 Magical Doorkbobs, so they get the fans to do it instead, and feel grateful for the privilige?
If so much cash may be won by producing d20 material, why do they give away the right to do it so freely?
Quote from: JimBobOzThe simple fact is that there's not a lot of money in rpgs. It's not likely you'll make a living from writing rpgs, d20 or not. The same goes for other kinds of writing, of course - novelists are not commonly millionaires, more often it's a hobby, or something they pursue for a couple of years before giving up due to financial pressures.
The average novelist makes 6,000 dollars a year. My source for that tidbit is Mike Stackpole but it seems about right.
QuoteWhereas Dancey's presenting it as a sure bet. He's doing the old "fallacy of the excluded middle" himself. Either you write non-d20 stuff, and it'll be crap and you'll end up broke, or you write d20 stuff and you'll make a living. Fact is, most likely you won't make a living whatever you write.
Dancey was not presenting it as a sure bet.
What he was saying is, unless you already have a fan-based following (someone like Ken Hite or Robin Laws) or unless you have a radically different game idea to market, then d20 is probably a good bet.
And I think he's right.
For *most* people, d20, or *some* other established system, is a good bet.
If someone pitched me an idea and it wasn't under an established system, Id be very loathe to risk my money on it.
And let's say you don't care about making a living. Well then the difference is even more noticeable!
If you want to make a book, and spend 30 hours on it, and make 500 dollars in a year (using your number), wouldn't you rather make the same game, spend 30 hours on it, and make 750 dollars?
In short, no matter if you just have a book you want to write or if you're going to make a go of making this your day job, you're still likely to make more money, for the same amount of work, doing d20.
This is all things being equal of course.
There's plenty that could make it NOT equal. Like you don't care for d20.
But still, unless you are an experienced designer with a fan base that looks for your work, I would recommend d20. And I think that's all Dancey was doing.
I don't think he was being as definitive as you paint him. He didn't say "do d20 or else". He said he thought you'd make more money using d20.
Quote from: jrientsImagine playing in world designed around the covers of 80's metal albums.
YES!
I've always got some thematic music on when I'm working on game stuff. Over-the-top metal is often at the top of the list.
Hammerfall and
Blind Guardian* are more recent but have great Fantasy RPG style cover art. I'm listening to Shadow Keep (http://www.shadowkeepmetal.net/) right now. :D
SenZar joins World of Cinnabar on my list of games to order.:cool:
*(I'm actually putting a "Blind Guardian" in my game, along with some other metal references! :emot-rock:)
Quote from: JimBobOzCould it be that really you're not likely to make a living from it, that for Wizards it'd be a money-losing proposition to produce d20 101 Magical Doorkbobs, so they get the fans to do it instead, and feel grateful for the privilige?
Tangent: my wife and I started a list on the train home after the New Years party we went too and I think we got to 73. If I manage to come up with another 29, do you think it would be worth writing this up, just for the humour value?
Mate, people will pay for it. Say, a five-line paragraph on each one. That'd be about twenty pages in all. Slap a clipart pic of a doorknob on the cover, and add in the OGL - 25 pages. Sell it for $2! People will buy it, mate!
I insist that you dedicate it to me, though, since it was my idea! :p
Quote from: JimBobOzI insist that you dedicate it to me, though, since it was my idea! :p
Of course. It's the codpieces that are giving me the trouble. After the Codpiece of Prowess and the dreaded cursed Codpiece of Devouring I'm a little stuck
(that's not true by the way, I'm in the thirties, but for some reason it
is a lot harder than doorknobs. Please don't give me any ideas or I'll have to stop reading this thread for legal reasons)
If I can't get 101, I might just call it Magical Doorknobs rather than add filler or try saying that a codpiece that adds 2 to Charisma is a different item to a codpiece that adds 4
Quote from: StuartSenZar joins World of Cinnabar on my list of games to order.:cool:
That's awesome. Please note that the corebook contains no monster stats. The monster book is named after a Metallica song, IIRC, but the title is eluding me at the moment.
Creeping Death! Alas, though, it's not as good as the main rulebook.
SenZar is mechanically very solid for a game of its type.
This talk of Hammerfall is going to force me to put on Unbent, Unbowed, Unbroken RIGHT NOW! :emot-rock:
QuoteEither you write non-d20 stuff, and it'll be crap and you'll end up broke, or you write d20 stuff and you'll make a living.
Can you point me to where he says it's a sure bet that you'll make money selling d20, much less a living?