TPW?

Quote from: jrientsTPW?

Total Party Wipe

Ah.  We use the letter K around here.  For Kill, of course.

Quote from: KrakaJakMy thoughts on what MCWoD (new acronym!) will be:

How about McWoD? Like a McChicken, only with less chicken.

Quote from: KrakaJakA setting. The World of Darkness is coming up on six settings (Chicago, New Orleans, Rocky Mountains, Boston, with the meta-settings of UK and Mexico). However, there is no specific setting and no canon. Every city, covenant, tribe, and order can be something totally different from game to game.
 
I think MCWoD will be a Mega-Setting. I think he'll redefine everything.
 
There will probably be some setting specific new rules (bloodlines, disciplines, lodges etc.) but it will still use the Storytelling system.
Just like Ptolus was how Monte plays D&D, this will be how Monte plays WoD.

I don't play WoD, I just personally don't dig playing a vampire [in any system], so can you clarify; don't they already have this stuff?  They already did a setting reboot once, do you really think they want to do another one?  Isn't it more likely that he'll just get his own city if it is actually using the WoD rules?

I think it is still quite possible that it is something closer to CoC D20.  Remember that WW already is a D20 publisher (Sword & Sorcery line, and that now includes Ravenloft) as well as Monte Cook's books.

Quote from: WarthurSo, would that make Cook McCartney or Lennon in your book? (He'd be Paul for me. )

Cook is definitely Paul. Tweet is the "idea guy" while Cook is the "presentation guy".  Alone, Tweet's stuff has much more meat to it but tends to be less polished, while Cook's is just pretty but with little substance and way too commercial.

Together, they made a masterpiece.

RPGpundit

Ah, I would rather say that Cook excels in churning out mechanical stuff. If you want to get one inspired spell, there are other authors. If you want to get a spellbook or monster manual, Monte's the man.

I'm rather happy with some of the products from his company. Arcana Evolved has some very, very neat ideas, it's just that I have a slight dislike of Donaldson-esque fantasy...

Quote from: blakkieHow about McWoD? Like a McChicken, only with less chicken.

That's how my group calls it anyway

QuoteI don't play WoD, I just personally don't dig playing a vampire [in any system], so can you clarify; don't they already have this stuff? They already did a setting reboot once, do you really think they want to do another one? Isn't it more likely that he'll just get his own city if it is actually using the WoD rules?
 
I think it is still quite possible that it is something closer to CoC D20. Remember that WW already is a D20 publisher (Sword & Sorcery line, and that now includes Ravenloft) as well as Monte Cook's books.

There is no canon setting in nWoD. Think of it more like D&D. It's a toolbox for making horror games. There's no such thing as a setting reboot, because there is no setting.

There is no "true" incarnation of any of the Meta-Setting pieces. Lancea Sanctum is a feel, the Silver Ladder is a Flavor. The book that best illustrates this is the "Requiem Chroniclers Guide". Where it has new rules and settings for V:tR that can effectively change the game completely (i.e. a game completely sans clans, or games where the "beast" is a trickster rather than a monster, or some weird mostly diceless vampire opera).
 
However, they have made un-connecting setting books, for the people that want them. However, the Carthians of Chicago are a totally different beast (ha ha, a pun!) than the Carthians of New Orleans. You could make cities where the only vampire body-politic is 6 different sects of the Ordo Dracul.
 
I think Monte (given his acumen of Mega-Settings, AE, Ptolus, etc.) will construct an entire WORLD of Darkness. It'll be his take on Mortals, Vamps, Werewolves and Mages with special rules (withing the same system) changing the way they work fundamentally.

I think most folks think Cook's going to redo the WoD.

I'm expecting a straight d20 conversion.

Quote from: joewolzI'm expecting a straight d20 conversion.

Well, considering WW's history with sanctioned conversions...

Quote from: joewolzI think most folks think Cook's going to redo the WoD.

I'm expecting a straight d20 conversion.

Or OGL maybe.

Incidentally does anyone know how much experience he has playing using the d10 dice pool mechanic from WoD? Because if that is limited I'd say that it is pretty much a lock that it'll involved d20 dice.

P.S. No word yet about a named co-author? Perhaps someone from WW's stable to give the book some Vampish street-cred with customers?

Quote from: SosthenesWell, considering WW's history with sanctioned conversions...

He's done the core book only dance with CoC already, so I assume he'd be OK with that....or at least be able to judge whether or not he'd be OK with it. Plus he has a 4 year working relationship with WW.  I certainly could see being OKed to do a d20 conversion as the one thing to bring him back for "just one more". A one shot core rules conversion actually fits into that very well.....and then maybe they'll shunt him off to Iceland to work on video games. Hope he's brushed up on his Icelandic.

Quote from: joewolzI think most folks think Cooke's going to redo the WoD.

I'm expecting a straight d20 conversion.

yep, me too.  i suspect people were thinking d20 Call of Cthulhu would somehow maintain some resemblance to BRP when it was first rumored/announced that "Cook and Tynes are doing a new Call of Cthulhu!"

I'm suspecting d20 NWOD, and no Cooke-inspired re-imagining of the current ruleset.

Quote from: jrientsHoward's Conan possesses strength just like the typical muscled oaf that barbarians are portrayed as nowadays.  But Conan as originally written also possessed cunning, great talents in crafts besides warfare, and much natural intelligence.  These virtues are lost is the endless stream of bad pastiches and worse imitations that followed the original works, turning into today's modern 'Big Dumb Barbarian' who is capable, in 3.5, of little more than turning into the Incredible Hulk and hitting things with his axe.

Gygax knew Conan via the original stories.  I admit that his class as written is problematic, but it does present a totally different and clearer vision of the Howard-style barbarian.  For one thing, the Barbarian from Unearthed Arcana, in addition to being a killing machine, is an absolute skills whore.  Before even non-weapon proficiencies became the norm the Barbarian had a shitload of class features that were chock full of woodlore and other nifty stuff.

I use the 3.5 Barbarian gestalted with the Wilderness Rogue variant class to achieve the same effect.  In a non-gestalt game I wouldn't seriously consider the modern Barbarian for a Conan-like character.

The Amusing thing about this view, as a dedicated melee monster in fantasy games, is this: the barbarian has twice the base skill points as the fighter, and includes those skills that keep your fighter from being ambushed (that he lacks utterly, I might add...) spot and listen.

So: the current barbarian, while hardly a masterpeice of conanosity is hardly a 'big dumb brute that hulks out' in every regard. Other than the completely disposable illeteracy rule, which is... completely disposable.

Quote from: joewolzI think most folks think Cook's going to redo the WoD.
 
I'm expecting a straight d20 conversion.

Actually, not vey plausible.
 
Monte is doing a d20 conversion, it'll be much more than that. You don't get a setting designer like Monte Cooke and have him do just a rules conversion.
 
Then, there's development time and hype factor. Secret project M was a big deal at the last Gen-Con. Monte said it was an offer so exciting, he couldn't pass it up. You don't get excited doing rule conversions. He's had less than a year (which is a short, short time for WW boks to be developed), I don't think he could come up with an OGL conversion to handle the massive amounts of things possible in the WoD (unless it's more along the lines of, say, Mutants and Masterminds than D&D, also not likely, considering it's Monte Cooke).
 
This is also going to be one book. Doing a straight d20 conversion makes all of the crunch material from all of their previous books useless. Not a good thing for sales (and WW is definitely a Sales driven company). They're VERY successful with their current ruleset. Trying to split a system will divide your fanbase and is ultimately not worth it (as they 've learned from SJ Games and again with Trinity D20).
 
Oh...and Monte Plays a lot of Vampire.

Quote from: KrakaJakOh...and Monte Plays a lot of Vampire.

Interesting. That makes a setting location + rules extensions (but not rewrite) based on what he runs at home ala Ptolus a lot more likely. But would you see WW letting him touch the whole world including cities already staked out, or would he just get his own sandbox city(s)/country(s)?

Quote from: blakkieInteresting. That makes a setting location + rules extensions (but not rewrite) based on what he runs at home ala Ptolus a lot more likely. But would you see WW letting him touch the whole world including cities already staked out, or would he just get his own sandbox city(s)/country(s)?

NWoD doesn't have a world. None whatsoever. It's whatever you make of it. So yes letting Monte make a World of Darkness doesn't suprise me. I'm sure if it does well, they'll do a whole slew of Guest designed World of Darknesses. It just like D&D in that aspect.
 
It would be Monte's World. How he plays it. Have it's own little Cosmos. It'll be like World of Darkness (Monte's Remix). If they'll let Greg Stolze make his own setting for the game, they'll let Monte.
 
At least that's what I think. It's definately way in the realm of possibility (more so than just a D20 conversion), it's too high profile a product to not try to do something big with it.