Quote from: daniel_ream;923405Is there any evidence that anyone but Stacy Dellorfano thinks that the OSR has a bad reputation among women, or that their physical appearance and presentation doesn’t have nearly as much appeal to younger or female gamers?

Certainly doesn't fit my experience - my Classic D&D game I GM has 4 young adult female players, 1 boy (my son), and 1 young adult male player, he was brought into the game by his girlfriend. When I've played Labyrinth Lord at a convention or the Meetup it gets at least as many female players as when I play 5e D&D. And there might have been Stacy-repellent stuff in 1970s Gygaxian D&D but it doesn't exist in any of the main OSR games that I can see. I think this whole thing is made up. Most OSR designers are men, but that is true of all RPGs, especially on the more hobby/less corporate side.

First, it's a retroclone, long after the age of retroclones. Who really cares?

Second, I think that the new cover and art style is at least a hell of a lot more creative than the pseudo-nostalgia that S&W banked on for its history thus far.

Well of COURSE Stacy's positioning herself as a "Voice of the OSR." After all, she's the "OSR Guest of Honor" at Michigan's U-Con next month:

http://gamersandgrognards.blogspot.com/2016/09/special-announcement-for-u-con-we-will.html

Its S&W. It might have new artwork but how many times can one sell the same FREE game to a niche group of hobbyists?

Its a statement that seems to have no purpose other than to make a statement.

If the goal here is to try to get OSR material produced by, and marketed to younger female gamers how about some original actual game content. OSR adventures written by and illustrated by women would be a better move than just slapping some new art on content that is old and familiar.

The premise for this little project could actually be interpreted as being a bit insulting to female gamers in a way. Hey, get this edition! Its the same old male created content, just with pretty new pictures drawn by girls!  What is that saying about female gamers? Content isn't as important as the window dressing?

The retro-clone market is very saturated with systems but under-represented by additional content for those systems. Original material is the way to reach the young female gamer demographic.

Quote from: CRKrueger;923397So they get all the interior art to be done by chicks, total gimmick, but whatever, it's art, in the end it will stand or fall on whether it's good or not.

Its kind of like someone standing in the middle of a forest and drawing attention to how they planted a tree in the vast empty wilderness. Pay no attention to those tall things with the green stuff on top!

Quote from: RPGPundit;923412First, it's a retroclone, long after the age of retroclones. Who really cares?

Second, I think that the new cover and art style is at least a hell of a lot more creative than the pseudo-nostalgia that S&W banked on for its history thus far.

Well if you are going to steal someone elses game and file off the serial numbers then you might as well make it look like it too... ahem... :rolleyes:

Meh. Who cares? I can't understand what the fuss is all about.

Quote from: Luca;923436Meh. Who cares? I can't understand what the fuss is all about.

Me neither. Funny story though, I've begun work on my own retro-clone/OSR survival horror game titled "Into The Darkness".

Quote from: Spinachcat;923322https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/froggodgames/swords-and-wizardry-complete-rulebook-3rd-printing?ref=profile_created

Man, that is ugly.

Ah, so the cover image is DELIBERATELY abstract and isn't supposed to represent anything, according to Stacy.

https://plus.google.com/+StacyDellorfano/posts/YtVkEMe1iva

Quote from: sniderman;923452Ah, so the cover image is DELIBERATELY abstract and isn't supposed to represent anything, according to Stacy.

https://plus.google.com/+StacyDellorfano/posts/YtVkEMe1iva

I've nothing against Stacy or this project, but really, it's a giant ugly fanny, so less abstract and more, well subliminal and pretty poor at being that. IMO its obvious, so either the artist has somehow managed a giant ugly fanny subconsciously, or it is done on purpose for reasons i can't really fathom. Those are some weird-ass fallopian tubes.

Quote from: Luca;923436Meh. Who cares? I can't understand what the fuss is all about.

Any time a company is forced, or feels forced, to hire someone for any reason other than "they are the best I could afford", that is a problem.
When the result is an otherwise popular book now has a meaningless, abstract cover that may drive people away from OSR games, that is a problem.

Sigh. I guess it was bound to happen that at some point that some noteworthy OSR publisher would break down and endorsing how the SJW's ideas would "improve" the OSR. Sadly to see FGG doing this publicity nonsense crap ( well we are talking about it , so yeah, it accomplished that). I dont feel any energy to being working up any steam about the whole deal.  Except it seems pathetic.  I mean really? Pimping S&W with that old token crap and pandering? Just tired and sleazy.

Am I the only one who sees that it's pretty clearly an ungulate skull being lifted off the rest of the carcass by semi-sinister nature magic that is replacing lost parts with plant matter? It looks like an old school Magic The Gathering card for a regeneration or reanimation effect.

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;923475Am I the only one who sees that it's pretty clearly an ungulate skull being lifted off the rest of the carcass by semi-sinister nature magic that is replacing lost parts with plant matter? It looks like an old school Magic The Gathering card for a regeneration or reanimation effect.

Well, that's what YOU see, but that's not what was intended:

QuoteAh, so the cover image is DELIBERATELY abstract and isn't supposed to represent anything, according to Stacy.

https://plus.google.com/+StacyDellorfano/posts/YtVkEMe1iva