Okay, this could be considered a shameless plug for our newest setting that is currently on Kickstarter (ElfWood). But that is not the intent. I'd really like some feedback.  This group of people has shown a capacity to analyze and offer suggestions (some easy to take, some less so) - but always good, solid response.  Sure, it's nice that we can present some of this and get your attention on our product, but our desire is feedback and discussion, not simply promotion (though, admittedly, that is a nice side benefit).

In fact, the solid, constructive responses from this site is a big reason why we chose to advertise here. We may not always agree. We may have a different perspective than what is posted. But, overall, this is a place we feel that we can trust for some honest, direct and no-holds-barred commentary on our thoughts, ideas and products.

However, we are looking for perspectives on what makes something a "Fantasy Heartbreaker"?

Statistically, fantasy games garner the highest sales. I don't know how skewed that is with Pathfinder and D&D in consideration.  Is it really true that a fantasy setting sells better than other genres amongst companies that offer lots of support for other settings?  

So, tell us:

What makes a game a "heartbreaker" by definition? Is it that lots of time, money, blood, sweat and tears are poured into the product and it fails to perform?  

This is relevant to us because we're releasing ElfWood - a fantasy setting with some twists.  I'm hoping it performs.  But, to be honest, I'm hoping it's more of a "gateway" into our other realms.

Promised Sands was our first full setting released and it did pretty well. It's sorta / kinda fantasy - with a large dose of post-apoc.

But ElfWood is pure fantasy (with twists).

Our worlds are always a bit "wonky" - and that's how we like them.  Are the twists too much? Or are they not enough?

Elves that are born from trees and grow trees from their heart-seeds when they die - such that their roots, branches and trunks entertwine, growing into the great "Mother Trees" of the forest.  Three distinct branches of their race: Vyrden (forest), Stygian (dark) and Sanguine (blood).

Dwarg who have no females and literally "spring from the earth" to be taken in and adopted by "mentor/fathers" who raise them as members of their great "fatherland".

Humans devastated by a blight, a plague - that devastated their reproductive abilities and drove them into a nomadic, wandering existence dependent on a similarly blighted ("scalding") ocean.

Orcs who are born from the remains of elves slain in violence, whose thorny trees produce orcs in the same way that the Mother Trees produce elves.

M'raak halfbreeds - half-elf, half-orc - who wander about, not truly accepted by either branch that created them.

Taurim raised from the bison of the great plains by the humans to "take over" for them when they took to the seas, before the blight. Now they rule the great lands to the west of the elvish isles.

Kague were born from the same plague the devastated the humans, having settled into the dark places and the sewers.

Drey, also raised from the creeping things of the world, who live a hivelike existence, hunting the Elves for the life magic in their heart-seeds.

Windsormen, the living ElfWood statues of men who once crewed the greatest of their vessels -- the Wind Soar. Wandering in unlife, unable to retain memories more than 30 - 50 years.

The world is Lakates, a ringed world, full of life, light on minerals, dominated by the elven culture, on the brink of war, facing the portents of prophecy.  

We strive not to present a "metaplot" to the world, rather to tell the whole history and give GMs the freedom to establish their own games within the timeline whenever they see fit.  No future products to change the timeline.  No force-feeding timeline updates through newly released products.

We're trying very hard not to box anyone in - and we encourage GMs to creatively alter anything we present to better fit their gaming groups.

I'd really like your thoughts on this - is this a "fantasy heartbreaker"?

You're using a sometimes contentious term purely as bait to draw people into a thread that's really just an ad for your game. You don't want a discussion, you just want customers. Fuck you.

It sure looks like one.

Eponymous essay with original definition here.

Well here's the original essay on the subject http://www.indie-rpgs.com/articles/9/ . It's not exactly a scientific classification so I don't think there is much point arguing the semantics about what is a heartbreaker and what isn't.

One thing to bear in mind the essay is looking mostly at 90s games and 90s gaming culture when publishing options for a game were very different. My feeling gut feeling would be to say osr and the modernised "tribute" games are an entirely different development.

And yes, it is yet another Forge term that has gone mainstream.

Quote from: Ben Rogers;711469However, we are looking for perspectives on what makes something a "Fantasy Heartbreaker"?

In over 40 years of gaming I've never heard that term used related  to a game.  Probably should use terminology that is used broadly by the  community if looking for a meaningful response.

Quote from: Arduin;711480In over 40 years of gaming I've never heard that term used related  to a game.  Probably should use terminology that is used broadly by the  community if looking for a meaningful response.

Or you just don't get out much.

Quote from: Soylent Green;711479One thing to bear in mind the essay is looking mostly at 90s games and 90s gaming culture when publishing options for a game were very different. My feeling gut feeling would be to say osr and the modernised "tribute" games are an entirely different development.

Yeah; they aren't trying to be not-D&D and kinda failing, they're just just being D&D. Different thing.

For the rest of this;

Quote from: soviet;711476You're using a sometimes contentious term purely as bait to draw people into a thread that's really just an ad for your game. You don't want a discussion, you just want customers. Fuck you.

Quote from: Bobloblah;711485Or you just don't get out much.

Google gives 987 hits on TheRPGSite alone for the term "fantasy heartbreaker: http://www.google.co.nz/#q=%22fantasy+heartbreaker%22+site:therpgsite.com

Quote from: Skywalker;711488Google gives 987 hits on TheRPGSite alone for the term "fantasy heartbreaker: http://www.google.co.nz/#q=%22fantasy+heartbreaker%22+site:therpgsite.com

I should have known.  A term made up my elf fan boi Edwards.  No wonder it isn't in use in the real world.

The original essay about fantasy heartbreakers is a must-read for any game designer. It's not an attack on those authors creating fantasy games. It's a warning about "almost-good" games that needed to take one more step in an original direction, but instead fell back on some D&Dism that ended up dooming the game.

Many retro-whatevers (those not true retroclones) in the OSR can fit under that definition. There have also been WoD heart breakers, especially in the 90s when you saw RPGs that came out that leaned too hard on Vampire.

I thought a "heartbreaker" had to remind you of the good old days?

For me, I would say no, not a match.

From the essay, I got the sense that it breaks Ron Edwards' heart.  I don't mean this facetiously.

It's a game that has something mechanically interesting about it (e.g. a cool magic system or whatever), but then which unthinkingly accepts the trappings and assumptions of D&D (or whatever).

So heartbreaker: "This game breaks my heart. The magic system is cool, but it doesn't live up to the hope I had that it would be really interesting from a game design perspective, in other respects it has no aspirations to interesting game design."

Not being involved with the Forge at all, and completely unaware of an article about "fantasy heartbreakers" -- I was familiar with the term, but unaware of the origins or article...

I found this interesting:

QuoteAll of these games have skill lists.

The system we use has skills, so this could apply.

QuoteAll of them except one have randomized attribute systems, but also an extensive set of secondary attributes which serve to homogenize the actual Effective values (i.e., those used in play).

We don't use random attribute systems. We use resource allocation or lifepath creation.

QuoteAll of them greatly emphasize character race (species, really) as a major modifier of the randomized attribute system.

Culture is actually more of an emphasis than race/species -- and, again, nothing random.

QuoteAll of them have levels in one fashion or another, but interestingly, in all cases, a very diminished version of levels with not-terribly-notable effects on the character's game effectiveness, compared with the role of skill proficiency.

Nothing in Sixcess is based on "levels".  Each attribute, skill, power, etc. has a "rank" - but that's more of a rating of how developed the attributes, skill, power, etc. is.

QuoteAll of them "crunchify" D&D combat in a RuneQuest or Rolemaster or DragonQuest fashion, placing emphasis on individual character speed and action-by-action (freeze-frame) resolution.

Our focus is actually more on story. The mechanics are there just to help you resolve random events.

QuoteAlmost all of them rely heavily on damage rolls, but make some effort to integrate "how well you hit" into the final effect.

Our "how well you hit" and "damage" are the exact same roll - thus, I don't think this fits, either.

QuoteAll of them have one speedy-race, one or more brute-race, and one pretty-race (either winged humanoids or kitty-people), as well as the standard elves and dwarves.

Let's see...
Elves, Dwarves, humans - yes.  
Taurim could be termed "brutes" - but they tend toward the gentle side
No real "pretty" race.
We have a winged race - but they're actually kinda nasty.
We have ratlings - but they're also really nasty.
Orcs are playable - again, nasty.
M'raak (Half-orc/half-elf) - despised and downtrodden.
Windsormen - animated wooden statues, basically.  Don't really fit any of the descriptions above.

QuoteNot one uses a D&D style magic system (much more about this later).

This one is true - we don't use a D&D-style magic system.  There are three types of magic in ElfWood and none of it "D&D-style".

Eight items listed, two potential "yes" items and six definite "no" items.

As someone else said, this isn't so much a scientific test.  So, are there any other typical fixtures/features of a "fantasy heartbreaker"?

As I remember from the essay, and my memory ain't what it used to be...

what makes it a "heartbreaker" is the creator's belief that "My houseruled D&D" is going to be The Next Best Thing That Takes The World By Storm.

In other words, if I publish my fantasy setting and say, "Hey, here's a fun fantasy setting I use for OD&D with the serial numbers filed off, have fun" that's not a heartbreaker.

If I say "The greatest, most awesome fantasy setting EVER since Blackmoor and Greyhawk that will become The Setting To Play," that's a heartbreaker.

Quote from: Ben Rogers;711516As someone else said, this isn't so much a scientific test.  So, are there any other typical fixtures/features of a "fantasy heartbreaker"?

What are you looking for? Confirmation that your game would fall under "fantasy heartbreakers"? That it wouldn't? Demonstrating your "features list" outside of the ads forum?

If you're smart enough to understand the "fantasy heartbreaker" concept, you've got enough game design expertise to understand and explain why you made your decisions.

But you certainly fulfil this criteria;

Quote from: Ron Edwardsor a deliberate attempt not only to present but to enlighten the reader about the self-perceived innovations.