Quote from: Sacrosanct;690515you're saying that all those things like tokens are completely unnecessary and signs of some badwrong fun

This is not what I am saying.

"When your idea of a professional RPG is to have cardboard counters, glossy paper and color artwork throughout to wank on in your spare time, I think you might be missing something about what RPGs are actually supposed to be designed for."

What that means is: IF the main criteria you are using to call a RPG "professional" is the presence of cardboard counters or glossy paper and color artwork in order for you to read through the book and look at the pretty pictures and basically "wank on it on your spare time", THEN I think you might be missing something about what RPGs are about.

IF/WHEN... THEN.

Condition ---> Consequence.

When your idea of a professional RPG is to have cardboard counters, glossy paper and color artwork throughout to wank on in your spare time, I think you might be missing something about what RPGs are actually supposed to be designed for.

It does NOT mean that "counters and glossy paper are unnecessary and bad wrong". It does NOT mean that the presence of counters and glossy papers are for wankers, or that they can't be great added value to games, or that they can't have an effect on the actual purpose of the game, which is to PLAY IT.

Good Lord man, you are talking to the guy who is drawing all the maps of the Hobby Shop Dungeon in full color, who wants films over the fold-ups and high quality paper in the boxed set in order for these things to be useful at a game table, so that you can spill some Mountain Dew on it and not wreck the map. Nice paper, color, protective films are not bad things in and of themselves! They are means to an end, and the end is to create GAMING products, to actually PLAY with those things, not to have them all "prettified" because they'd make for great reading/wanking material.

It means that if you're talking about RPGs as "professional" because you'd buy the books to read and look at them instead of playing them, well then, you are missing the point of a game, which is to be played. It's a truism, to me.

If you are saying that a game like Pathfinder or Warhammer 3rd ed is a better game product because glossy paper and full color artwork and all that when compared to say, DCC RPG, Arrows of Indra, RuneQuest 6th edition or other games like this, you are missing the point that games are meant to be PLAYED, at an actual game table, that they are GAME products, not reading or coffee table material.

THIS was my point. Jesus.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;690557I am firmly convinced that if POD printing and the internet (network with artists) existed in 1974 like they do today, OD&D would look much different from a presentation perspective.  So it's a bit silly to use technology advancements as a form of critique.

...and the same may well apply to dice and minis in a decade or two.  3d printing is a reality now, if it gets just a little more accessible...

Benoist, you know I agree with you more often than not, but when you say:

"When your idea of a professional RPG is to have cardboard counters, glossy paper and color artwork throughout to wank on in your spare time, I think you might be missing something about what RPGs are actually supposed to be designed for."

It pretty much implies that those things are badwrong, and at the very least personally attacking people who do think like that.  That's why you get the disagreeing reactions you get.

I know this, because I am just as bad at doing the same thing

Quote from: Sacrosanct;690584Benoist, you know I agree with you more often than not, but when you say:

"When your idea of a professional RPG is to have cardboard counters, glossy paper and color artwork throughout to wank on in your spare time, I think you might be missing something about what RPGs are actually supposed to be designed for."

It pretty much implies that those things are badwrong, and at the very least personally attacking people who do think like that.  That's why you get the disagreeing reactions you get.

I know this, because I am just as bad at doing the same thing

NO it does not. It's grammar.

Let's deconstruct the sentence.

[IF] When your idea of a professional RPG / is / to have cardboard counters (...) to wank on in your spare time, / [THEN] I think you might be missing ...

=

When you want glossy paper and counters to wank on and that is your criteria to call an RPG product "professional", then I think you miss the point that RPGs are products meant for play, not reading/looking at.

That's what the sentence means.

I'm not going to argue semantics with you, but you clearly associated those things (tokens, etc) as appealing to people who like to masturbate over them.

That's why you got the reaction you did, because it's insulting.

Quote from: Benoist;690577If you are saying that a game like Pathfinder or Warhammer 3rd ed is a better game product because glossy paper and full color artwork and all that when compared to say, DCC RPG, Arrows of Indra, RuneQuest 6th edition or other games like this, you are missing the point that games are meant to be PLAYED, at an actual game table, that they are GAME products, not reading material.

Design is inseparable from usability. Sometimes cards and tokens can detract from usability. Sometimes they can enhance it. Poor layout always reduces usability, though some people will notice it more than others.

One of the reasons I prefer WFRP 3E to WFRP 2E is because the font in the 2E books is way too small for me to read comfortably. The system does require reading away from the table, as well as referencing books during play. And I can do that easier and more pleasantly with professionally designed and laid out books.

Furthermore, for a lot of gamers play aids greatly enhance immersion. Really, that's the only function of artwork in a gamebook. Joseph Goodman clearly thinks it's important, or he wouldn't have paid all those artists to fill up the DCC with old-style illustrations. Now, if only he'd spent some of that money to hire a professional layout person...

I don't think 'wank' is a useful word here.  Nobody intends for these products to be a completely self-indulgent thing.  Ergo 'badwrongfun' is the only logical reason to use that word, IMO.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;690590I'm not going to argue semantics with you, but you clearly associated those things (tokens, etc) as appealing to peopel who like to masturbate over them.

That's why you got the reaction you did, because it's insulting.

It's not semantics. It's grammar. And I certainly did not say, AND mean, what you and others want to project on that sentence.

I know, because I wrote it.

There has been many a game that has been play tested to death by companies before, they ask for play test results opinions and suggestions, then when the game goes to print, they keep the same bullshit in the game the play testers told them to take out or change this for that, but they keep it in anyhow because they know best.

Play testing doesn't always mean a good game with a deaf publisher.

What Benoist's saying isn't hard, people.

"Production values are great.  Adding pretty stuff is great.  But they should lead to more playability, and be in service to it.  If you'd consider a glossy, unplayable game professional, while a perfectly crafted game in black and white typewriter text to be crappy, then you're putting the cart before the horse."

Quote from: Haffrung;690591Design is inseparable from usability. Sometimes cards and tokens can detract from usability. Sometimes they can enhance it. Poor layout always reduces usability, though some people will notice it more than others.

I agree. Sometimes black and white will make for good layout, and sometimes color will make for good layout. Sometimes adding counters and cards and all sorts of things will fit the design and the ultimate usability of the game, and if so, they should be there. If not, they shouldn't be there.

Quote from: Haffrung;690591One of the reasons I prefer WFRP 3E to WFRP 2E is because the font in the 2E books is way too small for me to read comfortably. The system does require reading away from the table, as well as referencing books during play. And I can do that easier and more pleasantly with professionally designed and laid out books.

What you construe as a "professionally designed and laid out book" is not a general objective rule. What matters is what the game is trying to achieve, and the way the form and layout and so on help to achieve this game play intent. In that sense, DCC RPG has a LOT going for it in terms of professional design and specific lay out aiding it to achieve its goal in terms of game play...

Quote from: Haffrung;690591Furthermore, for a lot of gamers play aids greatly enhance immersion. Really, that's the only function of artwork in a gamebook. Joseph Goodman clearly thinks it's important, or he wouldn't have paid all those artists to fill up the DCC with old-style illustrations. Now, if only he'd spent some of that money to hire a professional layout person...

... and that is exactly what you are intimating here. The layout actually incorporates all these illustrations, the black and white style is clearly intentional, and so on. After, whether you personally don't like black and white books and such is neither here nor there. If you have a massive problem with it, maybe you aren't the target customer of the design? It seems to please a damn lot of people besides you, myself included.

So my point really is that because you'd prefer a big font or color in a book does not construe an objective set of criteria to determine what is professional and what is not. All depends on what the game, its format, layout, content, ultimate use at a game table are meant to achieve, and whether they achieve this. The interesting case is when you have a precise set of intents, but the actual use of the game product is different than what you intended, but just as successful, if not more, than your original intent realized as you wanted it to would have been. I guess there's a lot of that going on with role playing games actually, because you can never exactly predict how your game is going to be used, as opposed to what you intended when you conceived it.

Quote from: Haffrung;690591Furthermore, for a lot of gamers play aids greatly enhance immersion. Really, that's the only function of artwork in a gamebook. Joseph Goodman clearly thinks it's important, or he wouldn't have paid all those artists to fill up the DCC with old-style illustrations. Now, if only he'd spent some of that money to hire a professional layout person...

Honestly, while good art can cover a multitude of sins I don't know if it's really essential. For example I recently had the opportunity to look at a couple of the Pathfinder books, and the art absolutely carried them. Take away the art and what remains is frankly pallid and unoriginal. Maybe they were trying to be unoriginal and if so kudos to them, but I found nothing inspirational about the text as written.

Books, plain old books, can enrapture us without the use of pictures so clearly it is possible to do better, but in RPGs there's an expectation that some art should be in place. The more and glossier the better to be honest, otherwise the writing had better be either new or top notch, preferably both.

Quote from: robiswrong;690599What Benoist's saying isn't hard, people.

"Production values are great.  Adding pretty stuff is great.  But they should lead to more playability, and be in service to it.  If you'd consider a glossy, unplayable game professional, while a perfectly crafted game in black and white typewriter text to be crappy, then you're putting the cart before the horse."

You guys are conflating "professional" with "good", and "unprofessional" with "bad."

Hand drawn maps and whatnot can be a perfectly good product, but it's not professional.  A glossy map and layout can be a bad product, but still be professional.

It would probably help eliminate a bunch of confusion if the terms weren't being used interchangeably.

Quote from: mcbobbo;690492I have always believe that the best products are collaborative. Take the Star Wars films.  When Lucas was just some guy he got his friends involved and together they produced something that reflected each of their strengths and only a few weaknesses.  But once he was a big shot he decided he didn't need any friends and produced the prequels with as little help as possible.  I think the difference in quality is pretty well settled.

Jobs and Woz is another example.

Dave and Gary is a good one from RPGs.  I am sure there are others.

All this is to say - I hope the mechanically minded people are making the mechanics for my games.  I just hope they are working with other talented people who can prop up their shortcomings.

Yes.  THX1138 is way different than later Lucas stuff.  He had his peers working with him on that movie.  Then he surrounded himself with "yes" people 30 years later.  I guess any company can suffer from this.  See FFE.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;690603You guys are conflating "professional" with "good", and "unprofessional" with "bad."

Hand drawn maps and whatnot can be a perfectly good product, but it's not professional.  A glossy map and layout can be a bad product, but still be professional.

It would probably help eliminate a bunch of confusion if the terms weren't being used interchangeably.

I've seen a lot of professionally written bad games and professionally drawn terrible maps.  Professional just means you got your money.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;690603You guys are conflating "professional" with "good", and "unprofessional" with "bad."

Hand drawn maps and whatnot can be a perfectly good product, but it's not professional.  A glossy map and layout can be a bad product, but still be professional.

It would probably help eliminate a bunch of confusion if the terms weren't being used interchangeably.

I've seen a lot of professionally written bad games and professionally drawn terrible maps.  Professional just means you got your money.