TheRPGSite

Back in February 2016, RPGPundit posted this in his forum...

Quote from: RPGPundit;881970Over on G+, Stacy Dellorfano (founder of the excellent Contessa convention), asked the slightly loaded question "Why does the OSR have a bad reputation among women"?

After 8 months and 603 posts on that thread, we FINALLY, we have the answer to Stacy's question!

The ANSWER is the OSR was not paying Stacy and her friends money!

Welcome to Swords & Wizardy: 3rd Printing (Women's Edition!)
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/froggodgames/swords-and-wizardry-complete-rulebook-3rd-printing?ref=profile_created

It has butterflies on the cover!

For all the grrls! 'Cuz grrls love butterflies!!

I.am.not.joking.

QuoteWe're starting to run low on our stock of the 2nd printing, and it's time to print some more. We didn't just want to do an exact reprint, and the history of the changes here date back a while ago to when we were talking with designer Stacy Dellorfano about the fact that many OSR games have a physical appearance and presentation that really targets the 40 year old guys who've been gaming since forever, and doesn't have nearly as much appeal to younger or female gamers of the generations following that first wave of players from the 1980s. In point of fact, old-school games, with their light-rules aspect and emphasis on a game master's "common sense" interpretation of situations, are actually a really good tool for anyone who feels like rules-lawyers may be spoiling the game by trying to be over-authoritative or even overbearing with a GM. But if the appearance and presentation make the game look like it's purely a throwback and not a modern tool for good gaming, then there's a real obstacle to the game's push into the mainstream gaming community.

As a result of this analysis, we engaged Stacy as a designer to produce an edition that's no less appealing to older male gamers, while being MORE appealing to younger and to female gamers. Stacy put together a team, all women, to address this dual objective. We think her team has done an awesome job, and when you see the design results, we think you'll agree.

Unfortunately, we think there may be some controversy about the fact that the design team here is made up entirely of women. We've already heard a couple of comments that generally turn on the idea of "Why restrict the project to women designers? Shouldn't the objective be to pull the best talent whether male or female? What a gimmick." We'd like to address that out front, rather than have it turn into a back-channel controversy in the halls of the internet. The missing piece of information is this: there are so many different directions that a project can take that there's no such thing as "the best talent." Given our goal of making the game more accessible, we hired – through Stacy – talent that coordinates with the goal. We asked Stacy to put together an all-woman team not as a societal goal, but because she had the chops to assemble the kind of team we wanted. This isn't a "pink" edition of the rules. It's the more-accessible next printing that we are targeting toward the mainstream market. It has always been our goal to get the open-ended rules of 1974-78 gaming into the mainstream, and this is our objective here. We think that Stacy's team has hit this goal out of the ballpark, and we think you'll agree.

"Out of the ballpark?" Not so much.

I do like the cover design as a piece of fantastical art (not as a RPG cover), but HOLY FUCKNUTS, just imagine the blogowanksphere meltdown if a dude tried selling a RPG with flowers and butterflies on the cover and declared "THIS is the edition for all you ladies!!"

But...they're totally grimdark flowers and butterflies.

The B/W interior art samples are a mixed bag, but the evocative borders for the various sections looks good. But thank goodness, our long nightmare of the OSR having a bad reputation with women is done. All it took was throwing Stacy some cash...and butterflies.

I pledged on it because the OSR needs more women creators.

The fact that it pisses you off is just icing on the cake.

Wait , they went from these awesome covers...

(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-QTbCTq082Nc/VSfcRo7C4_I/AAAAAAAADsc/Kkw4ShxqPec/s1600/Swords%2B%26%2BWizardry%2BWhitebox.png)


...to a picture of a shrivelled vagina?

Quote from: Ddogwood;923325I pledged on it because the OSR needs more women creators.

Whats adding more women creators changing?

Wouldnt it be better to, oh... I dont know... maybee add more GOOD creators? Rather than hiring someone based on their plumbing?

So I should go on a campaign to force the OSR to hire me because gaming needs to add more handicapped creators? Because theres not many of us.

This is probably a positive thing in the long run, some of the new interior art is quite cool, and they show guts by going out on such a creative limb.

But that cover is a very odd choice. Newcomers would never in a million years associate that image with "Adventure game".

• Claim X is problematic
• Stir up Internet Outrage Machine against X
• Tell X things would be better if only they hired unproblematic accuser to fix things
• Profit

...is such a common con that I'm surprised anyone is still falling for it.

Long time listener, first time caller. Cover's horrible for an RPG main rulebook regardless of whether a man or woman designed it.

Cover does not evoke an old school feel, and the hiring of an all-woman team seems gimmicky, which they admit to in the announcement. If it looks like a duck...

I guess I might be bothered if this was a problem. Instead it's just another Kickstarter. I do count myself among those not wowed by the cover, but the interior art is pretty cool.

In this case though, I don't really need another clone like S&W.

We've already talked about this I think.

But to me the cover looks really good and I don't have any issue with what Stacy is doing.

I like the new cover... it's not really telling me much about what the game is about, but whatever. It still looks like something that could be on a heavy metal album cover.
Stacey is pretty cool too... from what I've seen/read. I'll resist letting this push my buttons until I see more of it.

Quote from: Ddogwood;923325I pledged on it because the OSR needs more women creators.

The fact that it pisses you off is just icing on the cake.

I'm mocking it! I am laughing at it. I'm not pissed off. I AM PISSING ON THE LAUGHABLE HYPOCRISY OF IT ALL.

Butterflies on the cover...for the grrls! LOL. That's amazing.

Just so you know, I'm a long time dedicated S&W:White Box fan so if Frog God is making money, I'm VERY good with that. Your pledge benefits me as a OSR fan so open up your wallet and let it rain!!

But as for your babbling about "women creators", it looks like your reading comprehension needs some work:

Here's what the KS says about the game text:

QuoteWhat's Different?

Just the artwork and layout! The text of the book is exactly the same as it was in the 2nd printing save for some minor adjustments to the gameplay example.

And just in case you missed it, the KS says it again.

QuoteThis is Swords & Wizardry the same as it's been for the last two printings, just with new artwork and layout for the new printing.

It actually would have been a FAR MORE interesting project if the Contessa team had done a ground up rewrite of the S&W text. This is just a new art and layout with an Identity Politics gimmick to boost sales.

Quote from: daniel_ream;923334

• Claim X is problematic
• Stir up Internet Outrage Machine against X
• Tell X things would be better if only they hired unproblematic accuser to fix things
• Profit

...is such a common con that I'm surprised anyone is still falling for it.

And for this I say KUDOS to Stacy Dellorfano and her team. It's smart capitalism to prey on a weak point, snap it open (legally) and suck out some juicy cash. I don't begrudge artists for using every angle to make a living. Easy targets and low hanging fruit should be their first targets.

I do expect the S&W KS to do quite well (some of the interior art is solid, especially the borders), especially as now Pledging = Virtue Signalling (see Ddogwood above). Then we will see if this gimmick draws in some other publishers.

QuoteBut if the appearance and presentation make the game look like it's purely a throwback and not a modern tool for good gaming, then there's a real obstacle to the game's push into the mainstream gaming community.

(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/4tvAjX5ACPo/hqdefault.jpg)

Simlasa, your forum pic is the best. As I said, I like the cover art (not for a RPG), but yeah its totally death metal album art.

I agree Stacey is pretty cool too. And she's smart. She knows how to push buttons to further herself and her agenda and I respect that.

I'm just laughing at the gimmick...and the grimdark butterflies.

I was curious so I put the covers together below. Yeah, I'm not particularly taken by the cover, either, but then again, I am in the 40-something long-time gamer guy demographic, so the cover pretty explicitly isn't to my tastes. I'm doubtful that just switching over the artwork like they've would make a significant difference in generating sales to a younger demographic. I expect, however, that controversy over the new artwork will generate a lot of discussion and attention and thus generate sales.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]434[/ATTACH]

Quote from: jhkim;923359I was curious so I put the covers together below. Yeah, I'm not particularly taken by the cover, either, but then again, I am in the 40-something long-time gamer guy demographic, so the cover pretty explicitly isn't to my tastes.

I'm doubtful that just switching over the artwork like they've would make a significant difference in generating sales to a younger demographic. I expect, however, that controversy over the new artwork will generate a lot of discussion and attention and thus generate sales.

1: I think the disconnect is that it does not fit the previous general styles and Im not sure what the new cover is supposed to be saying about the game? Still looks like a horror game cover. Hows this supposed to attract women?

2: Probably. Its a pretty common marketing ploy now-a-days.

Now they should re-release Wraethru with an Earl Norem cover.

Quote from: Spinachcat;923354It's smart capitalism to prey on a weak point, snap it open (legally) and suck out some juicy cash. I don't begrudge artists for using every angle to make a living. Easy targets and low hanging fruit should be their first targets.

No, smart capitalism would be writing their own retroclone rather than using the SJW extortion playbook.  Simply nagging a successful male creator until he agrees to let the girls ride his coattails with some execrable art isn't exactly the shining example of equality I think people are expecting (cf. also Lovelace, Ada)

Quote from: daniel_ream;923373No, smart capitalism would be writing their own retroclone rather than using the SJW extortion playbook.  Simply nagging a successful male creator until he agrees to let the girls ride his coattails with some execrable art isn't exactly the shining example of equality I think people are expecting (cf. also Lovelace, Ada)

Is that actually what happened though? I mean, I think the cover is awful, pandering, an so off point of the purpose of the game as to make it stick out like a token minority in a straight to video ski comedy, but for all I know this was the game writer's idea.

My inner shitlord must be out to lunch, because this doesn't bother me in the slightest.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I like the character sheet.

This is the field in which my fucks are planted, and yea verily it is barren.

If it does make the cover more attractive to somebody other than middle aged plus males, good on 'em.  I don't need it.

I've got my... I've got my... I've got my D&D....

Quote from: Spinachcat;923322The B/W interior art samples are a mixed bag, but the evocative borders for the various sections looks good. But thank goodness, our long nightmare of the OSR having a bad reputation with women is done. All it took was throwing Stacy some cash...and butterflies.

So it's like an Al Sharpton/Jesse Jackson type thing? Give them money so they stop complaining?

Quote from: daniel_ream;923373No, smart capitalism would be writing their own retroclone rather than using the SJW extortion playbook.  Simply nagging a successful male creator until he agrees to let the girls ride his coattails with some execrable art isn't exactly the shining example of equality I think people are expecting (cf. also Lovelace, Ada)

No one held a gun to his head. It was his decision to reach out to her. To me it just sounds like he wanted to try something a little different and maybe wanted to reach a new audience.

Quote from: jhkim;923359I expect, however, that controversy over the new artwork will generate a lot of discussion and attention and thus generate sales.

Attention, obviously. Sales are more iffy. Maybe as a curiosity for collectors. But I doubt anyone who plays RPGs is going to buy this because of the new cover, and people who don't play RPGs aren't going to care either way.

So they get a new cover which sucked ass when we covered the cover before (actually it doesn't suck ass as art, it's cool for that I think, but it's not a D&D cover.  Maybe some LotFP or Nobilis game.  This is the first time I've heard the particulars of the artist's peehole.)

So 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.  I hope Frog God gets their new audience, then the ladies and SJW's can know what it feels like to be assraped by Frog God's idiotic collector-based KS prices just like the rest of us do.

Quote from: daniel_ream;923334

• Claim X is problematic
• Stir up Internet Outrage Machine against X
• Tell X things would be better if only they hired unproblematic accuser to fix things
• Profit

...is such a common con that I'm surprised anyone is still falling for it.

'Falling'?  My poor Mr. Ream, it's BECOME THE STATUS QUO!  This is why it's constantly working.  And no, I am not being facetious or silly, I sincerely wish I was.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;923390No one held a gun to his head. It was his decision to reach out to her. To me it just sounds like he wanted to try something a little different and maybe wanted to reach a new audience.

That's what it sounds like to me too, but then again I don't think everything is a move in some game of 4d politics.

Quote from: Just Another Snake Cult;923332But that cover is a very odd choice. Newcomers would never in a million years associate that image with "Adventure game".

I can't associate the cover with anything. Other than the butterflies, I honestly have no idea what I'm looking at. Is that a ribcage in the background? Mushrooms? And I'm completely clueless about whatever is floating in the middle of the cover. Some sort of skull with... tree branches exploding from its ear holes? And pink Cthulhu tentacles? And energy bursting from its top for some reason?

I feel like it's a Rorschach test. And not a very good one.

Quote from: TristramEvans;923374Is that actually what happened though?

QuoteOver on G+, Stacy Dellorfano (founder of the excellent Contessa convention), asked the slightly loaded question "Why does the OSR have a bad reputation among women"?

Quotewe were talking with designer Stacy Dellorfano about the fact that many OSR games have a physical appearance and presentation that really targets the 40 year old guys who’ve been gaming since forever, and doesn’t have nearly as much appeal to younger or female gamers of the generations following that first wave of players from the 1980s.

Is 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?

You've got trouble - yes, you've got trouble - right here in the OSR. Only Professor Stacy Dellaforno can save your children from iniquity with this here marching ba - er, woman-designed cover.

Everything else aside, that's a pretty shit piece of graphic design.  I don't know what the hell that thing on the cover is supposed to be, but it doesn't say anything about the game.  It's not evocative; it's not even representative of anything.  The other covers show a clear tableau that communicates what the game is about.  And the titles blend in to the colours of the artwork below, making them unreadable - again, unlike the previous covers where the title was in a contrasting colour and pops off the artwork.  It looks amateurish.

Quote from: Ddogwood;923325the OSR needs more women creators.

Why?

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. :D

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

Quote from: yosemitemike;923410Why?

Because we judge people based on their genitals.

Quote from: JamesV;923402That's what it sounds like to me too, but then again I don't think everything is a move in some game of 4d politics.

RPGsite, U R doing it wrong noob.

I will say nothing about the game itself or the creators, as I know too little about either to comment meaningfully. I speak only about the cover. It is a bad cover. I consider a cover to be good if it does what it's meant to do: attract interest and in the case of an RPG, tell the viewer a little about the game and its general genre. This cover completely fails at that. "Swords and Wizardry" is all it says, and the image conveys nothing about tone or setting. If I saw this on a shelf, I'd just keep looking. It wouldn't even earn a quirked brow. Contrast it it with the famous cover of the AD&D Player's Handbook. It's obvious from the first glance that the game involves fighting things, ancient sinister temples, and of course, loot. Or Traveller. The famous LBB covers state right on the front "Science-Fiction Adventure in the Far Future." The black cover with red stripe and white print is simple, clean, memorable and eye-catching. The current S&W cover is just weird, telling you nothing about the game's tone, setting, or really anything. It's dark to the point of being muddy, and what little it does suggest is gruesome and creepy at best, something along the lines of a black magic horror film. At best. There's nothing engaging about it.

I like the new cover, and don't give a fuck what's the plumbing of whoever designed it. The butterflies remind me of someone casting Rain of Obsidian Butterflies, so I actually like them, though it's not quite the same setting:).

Besides, I believe the words "Swords and Wizardry" tell anyone with half a brain what it is that you do in this game, you sword things (remember the "w" is vocalised when you use this word as a verb), and deal with wizardry;).

Quote from: AsenRG;923488I like the new cover, and don't give a fuck what's the plumbing of whoever designed it.

Great! I'm pretty sure people who don't like the cover also "don't give a fuck what's the plumbing of whoever designed it." Sadly, I have no doubt that people who dislike the cover will eventually be branded as woman-haters. Grab the torches and pitchforks!

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

*snicker*

Would have been funnier if they made the ampersand in S&W look like a "J".

Quote from: snidermanWell, that's what YOU see, but that's not what was intended

I don't care what she posted, there's degrees of abstraction and that is very clearly some kind of deer skull floating over a carcass being affected by magic. Look at the large high-def version.

Quote from: Whitewings;923483I will say nothing about the game itself or the creators, as I know too little about either to comment meaningfully. I speak only about the cover. It is a bad cover. I consider a cover to be good if it does what it's meant to do: attract interest and in the case of an RPG, tell the viewer a little about the game and its general genre. This cover completely fails at that. "Swords and Wizardry" is all it says, and the image conveys nothing about tone or setting. If I saw this on a shelf, I'd just keep looking. It wouldn't even earn a quirked brow. Contrast it it with the famous cover of the AD&D Player's Handbook. It's obvious from the first glance that the game involves fighting things, ancient sinister temples, and of course, loot. Or Traveller. The famous LBB covers state right on the front "Science-Fiction Adventure in the Far Future." The black cover with red stripe and white print is simple, clean, memorable and eye-catching. The current S&W cover is just weird, telling you nothing about the game's tone, setting, or really anything. It's dark to the point of being muddy, and what little it does suggest is gruesome and creepy at best, something along the lines of a black magic horror film. At best. There's nothing engaging about it.

Quote from: AsenRGBesides, I believe the words "Swords and Wizardry" tell anyone with half a brain what it is that you do in this game, you sword things (remember the "w" is vocalised when you use this word as a verb), and deal with wizardry

Yeah, I don't know Whitewings, I think you kind of undermined your argument with the Traveller example.

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;923502Yeah, I don't know Whitewings, I think you kind of undermined your argument with the Traveller example.

Sometimes no cover art is better than bad cover art?

It's an ugly-ass picture of a floating skull with some grimdark butterflies.

¯\_(°–°)_/¯

Quote from: Daddy Warpig;923508It's an ugly-ass picture of a floating skull with some grimdark butterflies.

¯\_(°–°)_/¯

Warhammer Girls Edition?

Quote from: jeff37923;923504Sometimes no cover art is better than bad cover art?

Yes, that's true, but I was referring to when he said this earlier in the post:

Quote from: WhitewingsI consider a cover to be good if it does what it's meant to do: attract interest and in the case of an RPG, tell the viewer a little about the game and its general genre.

I know this is going to rankle some people (and I do apologize Jeff), but to me the Traveller cover looks like a VCR instruction manual or an orientation pamphlet for a high end chemistry camp. Aside from that fragment of explanatory text it doesn't tell me anything about exactly what style of sci-fi I can play with it and it certainly isn't interesting.

EDIT: I just realized I'm thinking of later editions of Traveller that omit the Free Trader Beowulf text. I apologize, that actually is interesting.

The cover we are discussing at least looks like romantic (in the philosophical sense) fantasy with overtones of druidic mysticism and creepy danger. It's probably not the cover I would choose for a game like this, but I'm not personally baffled.

Quote from: Wraith;923492Great! I'm pretty sure people who don't like the cover also "don't give a fuck what's the plumbing of whoever designed it." Sadly, I have no doubt that people who dislike the cover will eventually be branded as woman-haters. Grab the torches and pitchforks!

For all I know, they might or might not be, just as those who like the cover might be or might not be those same things.
The truth, however, is that there's simply no direct causal relation between liking or not liking a cover and such qualities and drawing such conclusions in either direction on the basis of a cover is...hasty, at best.

Quote from: jeff37923;923504Sometimes no cover art is better than bad cover art?

But this wasn't the argument presented by Whitewings, he said the cover is "telling you nothing about the game's tone, setting, or really anything".

I like it. Though it looks a lot more like what LOFTP would show than what S&W has done before. I think the cover will be less of a problem than the usual price they charge for this shit, tho.

Looks like the cover to a third-party Changeling supplement, circa 1998.

The image is OK, but from a design standpoint it's rather tepid.

Where does this version of Swords & Wizardry fit in its art timeline - before the Erol Otus one? It was one of my favorites, and I don't even play Retroclones. (Rick Sardinha was the artist, I think).

[ATTACH=CONFIG]435[/ATTACH]

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.

You're right, it's obviously the skull of a deer, elk, moose whatever.  What people have described as a uterus is the skull, with nostrils and eyesockets clearly defined.  What people are calling fallopian tubes are some magical plants/branches, taking the place of the antlers.  Hard to tell what the three weird energy things are, but maybe the source of the power?  You can clearly see the ribcage of the skeleton the skull is rising from.

Quote from: K Peterson;923523Where does this version of Swords & Wizardry fit in its art timeline - before the Erol Otus one? It was one of my favorites, and I don't even play Retroclones. (Rick Sardinha was the artist, I think).

[ATTACH=CONFIG]435[/ATTACH]

Thats interesting. Doesnt fit the style of the others.

A quick search shows it was a Kickstarter edition in 2012.

Theres also a few more versions of the cover out there.

(http://www.rpgnow.com/images/10351/190631-thumb140.png)

Quote from: CRKrueger;923536You're right, it's obviously the skull of a deer, elk, moose whatever.  What people have described as a uterus is the skull, with nostrils and eyesockets clearly defined.  What people are calling fallopian tubes are some magical plants/branches, taking the place of the antlers.  Hard to tell what the three weird energy things are, but maybe the source of the power?  You can clearly see the ribcage of the skeleton the skull is rising from.

Yes, its clear what elements comprise it, in the same way that its clear that it is a vaginal image, in the same way the washington monument is clearly a spire composed of iron and concrete, but is also very clearly a phallic image. I'm ...highly skeptical...that the imagery of the cover was accidental, especially in context, but if that is the case its almost endearingly self-unaware on the part of the artist.

All that aside, the difference between good and bad art in an rpg specifically, from my personal POV, is whether the art is inspirational and either tells a story or presents a situation that draws one into the spirit or world of the game, technical ability aside. The art presented here is technically adequate, but it doesn't lure me into the gameworld in any way.

But none of that matters. I'm not the target audience for this game. I could care less about another D&D retroclone (I still have my original books if I was so inclined, and I'd rather enjoy trying out RedBox Hack or something of that nature). So, there's a bit of puzzlement on my part perhaps on the distancing of this retroclone from the Old School aesthetic its original covers captured so well, but I wish them the best.

Among internet dwelling rpg players (or people who just like to talk about it), it is established that there is a collective of people who have invested a lot of themselves into women and "&" (insert your favorite group) issues.

Since this group does exist (exact numbers unclear), and the OSR game market has matured to the point that it is really, really hard to differentiate a particular D&D clone, it makes sense to do whatever you can to incite as much talk about it as possible and provoke controversy. This isn't Blue Rose, so the game didn't already have a history of it to draw on. But maybe you can guilt some people who have very vocally jumped on this particular political bandwagon as a self appointed champion into buying it, or give them an illusionary feel-good-about-themselves tingle that buying an unnecessary leisure product is somehow making the world a better place.

It does make a lot of marketing sense. It is a hard thing to market a product in a mature market space, especially when your product has no substantially differentiating features.

Quote from: TristramEvans;923544The art presented here is technically adequate, but it doesn't lure me into the gameworld in any way.

It doesn't tell me much about the game BUT, I think if it were on a store shelf I would probably pick it up and have a look... because the image is intriguing and non-specific... mysterious even. Unlike previous editions.
I'd probably be expecting something more horror-related, or more slanted toward romantic fantasy (not in the Harlequin Romance sense).
I might be disappointed once I find it's just another D&D clone, but maybe the cover would inspire me to approach the game from a different angle.

1. Stacy seems okay. I don't read her blog or whatever.

2. S&W Complete is a good game and I'm thrilled it's getting a new printing.

3. Cover is shit and not in the least evocative, to me.

4. I am skeptical towards the idea that hiring more women creators will get more women to game. I'm pretty sure the best way to do it is, I dunno, for people not to be dicks to newbs? But then I'm not even sure this is the point? Ah well, whatever floats FGG's and Stacy's boats.

Quote from: K Peterson;923523(Rick Sardinha was the artist, I think).

[ATTACH=CONFIG]435[/ATTACH]

I don't have my copy with me right now but I think Jon Hodgson is the artist.

Quote from: The Butcher;923577I am skeptical towards the idea that hiring more women creators will get more women to game. I'm pretty sure the best way to do it is, I dunno, for people not to be dicks to newbs? But then I'm not even sure this is the point? Ah well, whatever floats FGG's and Stacy's boats.

Honestly, I'm skeptical that "not enough girls game" is even a thing, besides an invented problem in the heads of the OB. For the 30 odd years I've been gaming there's always been plenty of girl players.

Quote from: AsenRG;923513But this wasn't the argument presented by Whitewings, he said the cover is "telling you nothing about the game's tone, setting, or really anything".

I agree with Whitewings on that.

I am coming from the belief that cover art is a form of advertising. The art should cause the casual reader to consider purchasing the book. This current cover does not do that.

Quote from: S'mon;923387So it's like an Al Sharpton/Jesse Jackson type thing? Give them money so they stop complaining?

It seems a real stretch to see this as extortion. Who is being extorted? Frog God Games is funding this with a Kickstarter, and a successful one at that. Stacy is handling the layout and art. FGG gets their cut of the money. I'm having a hard time working up any outrage at FGG being shaken down here. They get to pull out an old manuscript and make money off it again.

As for the cover representing the book, how often do RPG books sit on store shelves in places where they will be seen by gaming neophytes in this day and age? It's mostly going to be bought online by people in the hobby. It's pretty rare for my first impression of a game to be seeing it sitting on a shelf.

Quote from: Lynn;923546Among internet dwelling rpg players (or people who just like to talk about it), it is established that there is a collective of people who have invested a lot of themselves into women and "&" (insert your favorite group) issues.

Since this group does exist (exact numbers unclear), and the OSR game market has matured to the point that it is really, really hard to differentiate a particular D&D clone, it makes sense to do whatever you can to incite as much talk about it as possible and provoke controversy. This isn't Blue Rose, so the game didn't already have a history of it to draw on. But maybe you can guilt some people who have very vocally jumped on this particular political bandwagon as a self appointed champion into buying it, or give them an illusionary feel-good-about-themselves tingle that buying an unnecessary leisure product is somehow making the world a better place.

It does make a lot of marketing sense. It is a hard thing to market a product in a mature market space, especially when your product has no substantially differentiating features.

That seems fair enough - so then it's a way to get SJW inclined gamers (mostly male, I suspect) to give the company some money, for very little work.

Quote from: Baulderstone;923587As for the cover representing the book, how often do RPG books sit on store shelves in places where they will be seen by gaming neophytes in this day and age? It's mostly going to be bought online by people in the hobby. It's pretty rare for my first impression of a game to be seeing it sitting on a shelf.

OK... then it will be seen, in passing, on DTRPG or somesuch. Probably a smallish image... so harder to make out what it is... might look more like a vagina, as some are saying. I might be disappointed it's not a vagina game... or not.

Quote from: jeff37923;923584I agree with Whitewings on that.

I am coming from the belief that cover art is a form of advertising. The art should cause the casual reader to consider purchasing the book. This current cover does not do that.

I strongly suspect that casual readers would be more likel to consider purchasing a book with that cover than with an TSR-era imitation.

Quote from: AsenRG;923611I strongly suspect that casual readers would be more likel to consider purchasing a book with that cover than with an TSR-era imitation.

Pick it up to look through, yes.  Purchase it?  I doubt it.

Quote from: TristramEvans;923583Honestly, I'm skeptical that "not enough girls game" is even a thing, besides an invented problem in the heads of the OB. For the 30 odd years I've been gaming there's always been plenty of girl players.

My anecdotal experience is similar to yours in a shorter time frame (20 years), but that's all it is, anecdotal. I wouldn't be surprised if the overall percentage of women in the hobby remains quite low.

My past self would have considered this an unacceptably unfair state of affairs that must have been mostly men's fault in some way. Women Are Wonderful* after all, gotta polish that pedestal for them, maybe make a big show of installing an escalator on it, I'm sure it won't feel awkward for anyone.

My present self wonders why I've never heard of any outrage or identity-politics fretting about the lack of men in hobbies like knitting or candle-making. Hmmm...
Amusingly, my mother is connected to the world of quilting and has mentioned that a small but influential influx of men into that hobby over the past decade has changed it... for the worse in her opinion. These men are apparently highly competitive and win a disproportionate number of quilting competitions. This then pushes everyone else to either become 'uncomfortably' competitive to keep up or withdraw a little from the scene.

But I suppose that's all anecdotal too.

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%22Women_are_wonderful%22_effect

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;923619My present self wonders why I've never heard of any outrage or identity-politics fretting about the lack of men in hobbies like knitting or candle-making. Hmmm...

A family friend works for A Very Large Romance Novel Publishing Company.  There are actually a surprisingly large number of men writing romance novels, but they have to do it under female pseudonyms because women won't buy a romance novel written by a man.  This tends to limit their careers because they can't go to conventions or do publicity events like book signings.  And the romance novel industry is worth orders of magnitude more money than the tabletop RPG industry.  So I don't worry about this stuff too much.

When people talk about "not enough X do Y", my reaction is always "define 'enough'".  At what point is this problem "solved"?

A couple of things really..

Does it really look like a shrivelled-up pussy? Just guessing, but are there four generic adventuring types facing off against a giant monster vag?

I'm not entirely sure in what circumstances anyone would personally deem my opinion about the cover of Swords & Wizardry could brand me as a woman-hater. As with every other role-playing rules manual in existence there is really only one determinant of objective quality and it has absolutely nothing to do with the authors' genders - Can I read this book this book in the toilet? If I can parse your combat rules while passing my morning constitutional that's a win in my book.

Has anyone tried to pose as a woman or work together with a woman to really earn the shit out of the rpg industry? You could almost by definition start publicity-controversy by announcing you're all about the wimmins. After the initial kick-start fundage could do a girl-band version of Judges Guild cranked out on a weekend. No matter how utterly horrible you got it would be an artisanal a-ok because you were a company by women for women. Collectors would love that shit.

This last joke is probably way over the line into 'Gilbert Gottfried getting fired by Aflac' territory but here goes. Why is it that any all-girl rpg team inevitably has at least one member who is in transition? Does Twitter have a Serious Questions hashtag? If so, that's where I would put that one.

Quote from: TristramEvans;923327Wait , they went from these awesome covers...

Personally, I think those covers are butt ugly.  This deliberately dated looking and, in my opinion, ugly as hell artwork is one of the things that has always turned me off about these retroclones.  For me, the new cover style is a definite improvement.

Quote from: yosemitemike;923627Personally, I think those covers are butt ugly.  This deliberately dated looking and, in my opinion, ugly as hell artwork is one of the things that has always turned me off about these retroclones.  For me, the new cover style is a definite improvement.

Diff'rent strokes

Quote from: TristramEvans;923628Diff'rent strokes

Indeed:). However, if S&W team is after expanding their target group, as it seems they are, it makes sense to include some different strokes.

You know, in order to have a better chance to appeal to people that don't already own 123456667890 OSR rulesets with the usual TSR-styled covers;).

The unified art appeals to me. I like DCC with its retro art and I like this book with its modern take which reminds me a bit of urban fantasy--mystical and powerful which fits perfectly as a S&W motif. It got me to look at the ruleset again.

In addition, the two new adventures are intriguing, especially the mystery/citycrawl. I like that the art style will continue through here as well.

I am very interested to see the stretch goals and possible add ons. And with a price for the PDF of $1 and hardcover $35 it is a fair deal.

Quote from: Simlasa;923566It doesn't tell me much about the game BUT, I think if it were on a store shelf I would probably pick it up and have a look... because the image is intriguing and non-specific... mysterious even. Unlike previous editions.
I'd probably be expecting something more horror-related, or more slanted toward romantic fantasy (not in the Harlequin Romance sense).
I might be disappointed once I find it's just another D&D clone, but maybe the cover would inspire me to approach the game from a different angle.

This is my thinking. I don't need a cover to convey information about how the game is played or what its focus is (it can do that, but it doesn't have to). I need to grab my attention and evoke some kind of interest in the game or some kind of excitement about running it.

Aren't the rules free in PDF form any way? Or I'm thinking of a different something&something retroclone...

Quote from: The Butcher;9235774. I am skeptical towards the idea that hiring more women creators will get more women to game. I'm pretty sure the best way to do it is, I dunno, for people not to be dicks to newbs? But then I'm not even sure this is the point? Ah well, whatever floats FGG's and Stacy's boats.
.

I'd be curious on some real numbers here simply because I am a slowly turning into a dinosaur myself and am probably a bit out of touch with what is going on in the gaming community. From my vantage point, I feel like the 90s was a highpoint in terms of the number of female gamers and the number of female creators. Locally, it seems to me that there are fewer female gamers (but my perspective is pretty limited).

I actually remember there being a ton of women designing for lines like Ravenloft in the early 90s (Andria Heyday, Lisa Smedman, Teeuwynn Woodruff, Anne Brown, etc). Lisa Smedman wrote a bunch of stuff as I recall. I haven't counted the numbers but I think something approaching half the books were written by women (maybe more if you include the novels). Whether that caused more women to join the hobby, no idea. I think for me, as a guy in high school it probably made me feel like women were more a part of the hobby than if the names on the books were all men, but not sure). I would agree though, people not being jerks to new players are the best way to make sure any group feels welcome (and over the years, this is something I've definitely seen gamers do to lots of people).

I don't know how the number of female designers with big companies today pairs up with female designers of big companies back then. It should be relatively easy though for someone to crunch the numbers on female game designers over the years (though the explosion of small companies in the past decade could make that harder if you include every single company under the sun).

When I see that cover, it's vague but I see a Leshen from The Witcher 3 videogame


(https://cdnb1.artstation.com/p/assets/images/images/000/265/977/large/marek-madej-leshen-by-marekmadej.jpg)
(https://assets.vg247.com/current//2015/05/the_witcher_3_wild_hunt_act_three_walkthrough.jpg)
(http://vignette3.wikia.nocookie.net/witcher/images/c/cd/Twag_monster_leshen.png)

Quote from: yosemitemike;923627Personally, I think those covers are butt ugly.  This deliberately dated looking and, in my opinion, ugly as hell artwork is one of the things that has always turned me off about these retroclones.  For me, the new cover style is a definite improvement.

You have very poor taste.

It might be that in general women trend towards certain genres or settings. Ravenloft, Vampire The Masquerade. But that can't be true given how D&D was popular across genders way back according to the old timer stories.

JHKIM has a list of notable designers who are women: http://www.darkshire.net/jhkim/rpg/theory/gender/womenauthors.html

I think it needs to be updated because it's missing Sarah Newton, Filamena Young, etc.

I like it. It makes me think of something spawned by Shub Niggurath, or some pagan Horned God (or Goddess). The MOTHS are creepy too (aren't they always?). Makes me think of a Death/Black Metal album cover. Or something James Raggi sponsored. Right up my alley.

I agree with the Pundit: the new cover is more interesting than the others, which are fairly generic, IMHO. Beautiful, but generic.

Pretty funny, though. They flat-out stated that this cover, or even the book as a whole, isn't meant to target traditional 40 somethings of the hobby. Judging by the responses by most 40 something traditionalist gamers, here and elsewhere, she was so fucking right. They also pre-preemptively dismissed statements like "why women-only? What a gimmick!" LOL you guys are matching the stereotype perfectly.

The other editions are still available. Why do you guys give ANY fucks? I mean really?

Quote from: ArrozConLeche;923646JHKIM has a list of notable designers who are women: http://www.darkshire.net/jhkim/rpg/theory/gender/womenauthors.html

I think it needs to be updated because it's missing Sarah Newton, Filamena Young, etc.

Don't forget Anna Kreider! :p

Quote from: The Butcher;923577I don't have my copy with me right now but I think Jon Hodgson is the artist.

Nah, I'm pretty sure it's Sardinha. RpgGeek entry. (https://www.rpggeek.com/rpgitem/88999/swords-wizardry-complete-rulebook) :)

In any case, I've sometimes confused this cover with the one for Ancient Kingdoms: Mesopotamia. Which is also quite nice.

They should at least change the books font.
Maybe something like this:

[ATTACH=CONFIG]439[/ATTACH]

Quote from: Necrozius;923648
Pretty funny, though. They flat-out stated that this cover, or even the book as a whole, isn't meant to target traditional 40 somethings of the hobby. Judging by the responses by most 40 something traditionalist gamers, here and elsewhere, she was so fucking right. They also pre-preemptively dismissed statements like "why women-only? What a gimmick!" LOL you guys are matching the stereotype perfectly.

The other editions are still available. Why do you guys give ANY fucks? I mean really?

Correction. They said the new cover art is supposed to appeal more to women without appealing less to men. I'd say from what I've heard about the cover, they've failed utterly. This is what happens when you hire people based on something other than their ability to do the work.

Why do I care? As I've stated before:

QuoteAny 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.

I never cared for the old covers much, but they at least communicated that it was an RPG book. Now? The new cover communicates nothing.

I don't know that they've failed. They're already fully funded.

Quote from: Necrozius;923648I like it. It makes me think of something spawned by Shub Niggurath, or some pagan Horned God (or Goddess). The MOTHS are creepy too (aren't they always?). Makes me think of a Death/Black Metal album cover. Or something James Raggi sponsored. Right up my alley.

I agree with the Pundit: the new cover is more interesting than the others, which are fairly generic, IMHO. Beautiful, but generic.

Pretty funny, though. They flat-out stated that this cover, or even the book as a whole, isn't meant to target traditional 40 somethings of the hobby. Judging by the responses by most 40 something traditionalist gamers, here and elsewhere, she was so fucking right. They also pre-preemptively dismissed statements like "why women-only? What a gimmick!" LOL you guys are matching the stereotype perfectly.

The other editions are still available. Why do you guys give ANY fucks? I mean really?

FGG's marketing plan use identity political assumptions that making S&W more interesting for women is the same as pandering to identity political agendas( like: "this part of the hobby has too many male gamers with male sensibilities = badwrongfun and should change"). It is a SJW narrative that the groups who's cuase the SJW contemporarily view themselves as selfproclaimed champions for, is best served by pandering the SJW's. Such as rereleasing a well established game with no other serious change than the marketing of women-only artists and anti-sword&sorcery aesthetics.

Seriously, the  aesthetics of this new printing looks very far away from "mainstream" sensibilities aimed at women in general (as others already have said, the cover itself looks like a generic cover from my black metal collection, in that way I like it). Since the SJW's is a dominant, but not unchallenged, fake "representative" of what is supposed to be viewed as the mainstream in social media. And such does seem to me as less of making S&W relevant to the mainstream, but seeking approval from SJW bloggers and social media.

Sure FGG have every right to do their businesses as they plearse, but blatantly say right in the face of their fans that people with their plumbing, age and sensibilities, even only implied, are from now on no longer a target group for the next rerelease of their in-house game is bound the get some disagreement. And doing so FGG puts themselves in the forefront (within the OSR niche) of a culture war that  the OSR have for many gamers been a haven from, since it has mainly been about love for the hobby and the games themselves rather pushing agendas because it has not been or tried the be in the" big mainstream"(as far as ttrpg's go), where the culture war still rage.

Quote from: Teodrik;923655FGG's marketing plan use identity political assumptions that making S&W more interesting for women is the same as pandering to identity political agendas( like: "this part of the hobby has too many male gamers with male sensibilities = badwrongfun and should change"). It is a SJW narrative that the groups who's cuase the SJW contemporarily view themselves as selfproclaimed champions for, is best served by pandering the SJW's. Such as rereleasing a well established game with no other serious change than the marketing of women-only artists and anti-sword&sorcery aesthetics.

Seriously, the  aesthetics of this new printing looks very far away from "mainstream" sensibilities aimed at women in general (as others already have said, the cover itself looks like a generic cover from my black metal collection, in that way I like it). Since the SJW's is a dominant, but not unchallenged, fake "representative" of what is supposed to be viewed as the mainstream in social media. And such does seem to me as less of making S&W relevant to the mainstream, but seeking approval from SJW bloggers and social media.

Sure FGG have every right to do their businesses as they plearse, but blatantly say right in the face of their fans that people with their plumbing, age and sensibilities, even only implied, are from now on no longer a target group for the next rerelease of FGG's game is bound the get some disagreement. And doing so FGG puts themselves in the forefront (within the OSR niche) of a culture war that  the OSR have for many gamers been a haven from, since it has mainly been about love for the hobby and the games themselves rather pushing agendas because it has not been or tried the be in the" big mainstream"(as far as ttrpg's go), where the culture war still rage.

I don't think that is what is going on though.

To me it looks like all they are doing is trying to expand their audience a bit, draw in more people. I don't think they are trying to fire the male readers, replacing them with female ones.

Whether this will draw in more female gamers, I don't know. That is hard to say. But I think when people get all hostile about it, it is just going to make the company dig its heels in further. I know if someone got pissed because I had some creepy butterflies on one of my covers, my instinctual response would be to put ten creepy butterflies on the next one.

We can have multiple aesthetics in the OSR. What matters to me is that things are not off the table. So when someone says "this is forbidden and bad" for SJW-reasons, it bothers me, but when someone says "this is forbidden and bad" for other reasons it bothers me as well. The moral outrage from ether camp can be equally annoying and stifling creatively.

Not saying everyone should love the cover. That is a subjective call. It won't appeal to everyone and I know that when you come to expect a certain look, it can definitely cause you to lose interest in a line. I had this experience with Ravenloft when they stopped using the Fabian art. So I do think that sensing a break in aesthetic in a line you love, is fair. I just don't think this anything more than trying to reach a bigger audience.

To me it is a cool looking cover and makes me think I can probably get players interested who might not otherwise take a look at the game.

Quote from: ArrozConLeche;923646It might be that in general women trend towards certain genres or settings. Ravenloft, Vampire The Masquerade. But that can't be true given how D&D was popular across genders way back according to the old timer stories.

JHKIM has a list of notable designers who are women: http://www.darkshire.net/jhkim/rpg/theory/gender/womenauthors.html

I think it needs to be updated because it's missing Sarah Newton, Filamena Young, etc.

Lies! Before 2016, women were kept on ranches where they were fitted with saddles and ridden around by the male oppressors. There's no way any of them could have escaped the patriarchal overlords to *gasp* write words!

Quote from: ArrozConLeche;923654I don't know that they've failed. They're already fully funded.

Apparently making a more feminine cover is bending backwards to terrorist demands. Or something.

Quote from: Tod13;923653I'd say from what I've heard about the cover, they've failed utterly.

Heard where? On the basis of what data do you declare this?

Quote from: BedrockBrendanI know if someone got pissed because I had some creepy butterflies on one of my covers, my instinctual response would be to put ten creepy butterflies on the next one.

You make it sound like "the pissed" (if that's an appropriate description of what's going on here) started it.
This thread wouldn't exist if they hadn't made a big deal out of their all-female staff and stated opinion that OSR art is on some subtle level exclusionary. Why couldn't they have just released the book without that kind of statement and let it stand on its own merit?

The fact that the OP mixes the topic of hiring an all-female staff, and the topic of the quality and attractiveness of the cover muddles this conversation. Two different things that deserve their own consideration.

Hiring an all-female staff does whiff of SJW crap, but as it is a one time thing, I'm not going to get into panic mode as have some people here. When it becomes a trend, then I'll consider it a real problem.

As for what you think of the actual product, hey, it's all in the eye of the beholder. It's worth asking oneself, though, if part of that dislike is bleeding over from the perceived SJW agenda of the hiring.

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;923659You make it sound like "the pissed" (if that's an appropriate description of what's going on here) started it.
This thread wouldn't exist if they hadn't made a big deal out of their all-female staff and stated opinion that OSR art is on some subtle level exclusionary. Why couldn't they have just released the book without that kind of statement and let it stand on its own merit?

I don't know who started it, and I am not talking about every single reaction here. I am just saying if people react to something with hostility, particularly if it seems especially pronounced because there are perceived political issues, it just makes the content creator dig their heels in further. For me, it doesn't matter if the person is an SJW or someone who is mad because they think I am catering to SJWs, if they attack me on those grounds for doing something, my instinct is just to do it more (mainly out of sheer stubbornness).  

My feeling here is it is good to have a broad range of aesthetics allowable. A lot of the responses I am seeing get into "book covers have to be X", which to me, is just as annoying as someone saying you can't have sexy on a cover or you can't have demons, or it needs to abide by political principles X, Y, and Z.

So if they were saying people shouldn't be making art that appeals to older gamers, or that the current retro-art is bad and evil, then I'd have an issue. But I just didn't really get that here. I've certainly seen people and companies engage in that sort of thing (where it is more about finger pointing and claiming to hold some kind of moral high ground). That kind of behavior, whether it is SJW or anti-SJW is what annoys me. If people are just broadening the aesthetic so it encompasses more, I am cool with that.

If you guys are this butthurt over a stupid cover on the new version of S&W, you could do me a favor and support my upcoming OSR game "Into The Darkness" once the rough draft is complete!

There's no SJW stuff in it (but then again, there's none in S&W even with the new cover) and you get to play OD&D as a brutal survival horror game that for some reason will have anime artwork in the final product because I am a shameless weeb who is willing to whore out his own game before it's even finished its concept phase and rough drafting.

But seriously, support the upcoming OSR game "Into The Darkness"! Especially if you decide to boycoot Swords & Wizardry for this reason.

And to get us back on topic, I don't see what the big deal is about FGG hiring a female developer for the new game. Yeah, the new cover is kind of stupid and abstract, but from what I gather, it's still the same basic game. It's not like Mage 20 where they use made up third-party gender pronouns and literally push SJW agendas out in the open. As far as I can tell, it's the same game as before, just with a weird-looking cover and a few more women on staff. I don't really see the issue here.

It wasn't just a female developer. It was an all-female team.

QuoteWe didn’t just want to do an exact reprint, and the history of the changes here date back a while ago to when we were talking with designer Stacy Dellorfano about the fact that many OSR games have a physical appearance and presentation that really targets the 40 year old guys who’ve been gaming since forever, and doesn’t have nearly as much appeal to younger or female gamers of the generations following that first wave of players from the 1980s. In point of fact, old-school games, with their light-rules aspect and emphasis on a game master’s “common sense” interpretation of situations, are actually a really good tool for anyone who feels like rules-lawyers may be spoiling the game by trying to be over-authoritative or even overbearing with a GM. But if the appearance and presentation make the game look like it’s purely a throwback and not a modern tool for good gaming, then there’s a real obstacle to the game’s push into the mainstream gaming community.

As a result of this analysis, we engaged Stacy as a designer to produce an edition that’s no less appealing to older male gamers, while being MORE appealing to younger and to female gamers. Stacy put together a team, all women, to address this dual objective

I'm not sure how it follows that hiring an all-female team will make a game more mainstream or appealing to the younger generation. I think they should just outright say that they are hoping to bring in more of the female demographic, and that they want to be inclusive to that demographic. That is what the intention really looks like. It's good that they're making an effort to find talent from a demographic that they feel is not adequately represented-- at least they're walking the talk, unlike Fred Hicks.

Quote from: ArrozConLeche;923672I'm not sure how it follows that hiring an all-female team will make a game more mainstream or appealing to the younger generation. I think they should just outright say that they are hoping to bring in more of the female demographic, and that they want to be inclusive to that demographic. That is what the intention really looks like. It's good that they're making an effort to find talent from a demographic that they feel is not adequately represented-- at least they're walking the talk, unlike Fred Hicks.

I think what they were trying to say was they hired the all female team to help reach more women, and they gave that team the instruction to make a cover that appealed to younger gamers without losing the older ones. Basically they wanted her to move away from a late 70s, early 80s aesthetic but in a way that would retain the interest of older male gamers.

Now that I parsed it again, I think you are right. Looks like the decision to hire an all women team may have been Stacey's rather than a directive from FGG. That makes it more consistent.

Quote from: Rincewind1;923658Apparently making a more feminine cover is bending backwards to terrorist demands. Or something.

Actually, I saw this cover a while before I read about the who & why of it. Without that context nothing about it struck me as 'feminine'... just that it stood in sharp contrast to what I'd normally expect to see. If anything it seemed a bit 'anime' to me (followed by 'metal' when I took a closer look).
I do wonder how the reaction, from all reactors, would have been different if they had not trumpeted the 'all female' aspect and instead just let it stand on its surface merits. Would it have funded as quickly? Would the complaints be as... complainy?

Quote from: Simlasa;923676I do wonder how the reaction, from all reactors, would have been different if they had not trumpeted the 'all female' aspect and instead just let it stand on its surface merits. Would it have funded as quickly? Would the complaints be as... complainy?

There you go... people only dislike it because a woman did it. :rolleyes:

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;923673I think what they were trying to say was they hired the all female team to help reach more women,

So they think that all women are a hivemind that like the same things? How sexist!

Quote from: Rincewind1;923658Apparently making a more feminine cover is bending backwards to terrorist demands. Or something.

What makes that a more feminine cover?  I'm genuinely curious, it doesn't strike me as "feminine" so much as "butt-ugly."

Quote from: Rincewind1;923636Aren't the rules free in PDF form any way? Or I'm thinking of a different something&something retroclone...

Correct. Still with the WOTC 3e boilerplate.

Quote from: Necrozius;923648Pretty funny, though. They flat-out stated that this cover, or even the book as a whole, isn't meant to target traditional 40 somethings of the hobby. Judging by the responses by most 40 something traditionalist gamers, here and elsewhere, she was so fucking right.

They also pre-preemptively dismissed statements like "why women-only? What a gimmick!" LOL you guys are matching the stereotype perfectly.

1: So the OSR is about exclusionism now? (Actually they didnt say it was excluding 40something males. So you got that wrong too.)

2: Of course if they dismissed it. (Im not seeing where they did though?) Then they knew it was a gimmic and would need to discredit anyone who pointed it out. Marketing 101.

Quote from: Rincewind1;923658Apparently making a more feminine cover is bending backwards to terrorist demands. Or something.

When they make a more feminine cover... let me know. Because this one sure isnt.

Quote from: Omega;923690When they make a more feminine cover... let me know. Because this one sure isnt.

Or maybe it just goes to show that what us guys think is 'feminine' and what actual women think it is are two different things?
(I didn't see it as 'feminine' either)

To be fair though. Its also possible that these women artists merely had what they thought was a cool idea. No agenda.

I'm sure they had no agenda whatsoever.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]440[/ATTACH]

Quote from: Omega;923696To be fair though. Its also possible that these women artists merely had what they thought was a cool idea. No agenda.

That's really my assumption... until proven otherwise.

Quote from: Omega;923696To be fair though. Its also possible that these women artists merely had what they thought was a cool idea. No agenda.

The agenda was already stated. Its not an agenda I'm particularly opposed to, but it was very clearly put forth.

I think we're making a mountain out of a molehill on this one.

Quote from: daniel_ream;923697I'm sure they had no agenda whatsoever.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]440[/ATTACH]

Welp, if it stomps around like an identity politics ideologue and trumpets like an identity politics ideologue...

Quote from: Doc Sammy;923701I think we're making a mountain out of a molehill on this one.

Oh absolutely, but then again your "mountain" is just a thread on a minor forum.

For the record, I am not opposed to this product in the end analysis, and if it ever found its way into my collection through circumstance I certainly wouldn't turn it away. I do reserve the right to harmlessly roll my eyes at the behavior of the sort of leftists who drove me to the center though.

Quote from: TristramEvans;923699The agenda was already stated. Its not an agenda I'm particularly opposed to, but it was very clearly put forth.

As far as I can tell the 'agenda' was FGG's (an that was just to try to sell to a wider audience)... not Stacey's. AFAIK She just hired people she knew and liked working with.

Quote from: daniel_ream;923697I'm sure they had no agenda whatsoever.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]440[/ATTACH]

[video=youtube_share;IFb_AERKha8]https://youtu.be/IFb_AERKha8[/youtube]

Quote from: Doc Sammy;923701I think we're making a mountain out of a molehill on this one.

Or just pointing and laughing at something stupid-ish.

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;923702Welp, if it stomps around like an identity politics ideologue and trumpets like an identity politics ideologue...

Pretty much.  There's an awful lot of crimestop (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughtcrime#Crimestop) going on in this thread.

Quote from: Teodrik;923655And doing so FGG puts themselves in the forefront (within the OSR niche) of a culture war that  the OSR have for many gamers been a haven from, since it has mainly been about love for the hobby and the games themselves rather pushing agendas

Ah... light bulb moment... now I understand Stacy's "Why does the OSR hate women?" comment (paraphrasing!). :D The SJW movement absolutely cannot allow any havens, any neutral Tanelorns. Once the OSR was identified as a haven it had to be attacked.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;923637Whether that caused more women to join the hobby, no idea. I think for me, as a guy in high school it probably made me feel like women were more a part of the hobby than if the names on the books were all men, but not sure).

I never thought about the genders of the people in the credits listing to begin with.  I barely looked at them at all.  If I had looked, I would not have concluded that the hobby was somehow less for women if I didn't see enough female names.  I don't understand this mindset to begin with.  If there aren't enough in the credits listing for games that means the games aren't for women and female players are somehow excluded from the hobby?  What?  Do you go through a game book, count the number of people who seem to have the same plumbing as you based on their names and then conclude it's not for you and you are excluded from participating in that game if that number isn't high enough?  Does anyone beyond a few identity politics obsessed SJW types do this?    Do women go through credits, count people with female names and think, "This is not for me.  I am excluded" if they don't count enough of them?  Is this really an issue at all?

They say this is supposed to appeal more to women while still appealing to men.  Why does an all female staff deliver that while an all male staff doesn't or can't?  Women can write for a general audience but men can only write for other men?  That seems to be assumed in a lot of this.  You need women to make the game inclusive but having only women doesn't make it exclusive.  Why?  Why do women equal inclusion while men equal exclusion?  

Quote from: danbuter;923645You have very poor taste.

(http://i432.photobucket.com/albums/qq45/oldhat321/no_u_for_knowyourmeme_zpsgbacsj4o.jpg) (http://s432.photobucket.com/user/oldhat321/media/no_u_for_knowyourmeme_zpsgbacsj4o.jpg.html)

Quote from: Doc Sammy;923667And to get us back on topic, I don't see what the big deal is about FGG hiring a female developer for the new game.

People are sick of the constant virtue signaling and More-Progressive-Than-Thou crap.  It got old a long time ago.

Quote from: yosemitemike;923724People are sick of the constant virtue signaling and More-Progressive-Than-Thou crap.  It got old a long time ago.

I agree with you on that, but as long as the S&W core game remains the same content-wise, I really don't care if the developers put on idiotic covers and attempt to pander to the SJW crowd.

I'm canceling my pledge after the latest Kickstarter update. It's obvious to me that this is an identity politics play more than just a cool product. The reason I think this is because they sure are spending a lot of time talking about how progressive and how many barriers they are breaking down compared to any discussion on how they will actually reach new gamers, younger gamers, and more women. Other than the fact there is a woman project maker and women artists and I guess step 3 is new audience that wouldn't play before? No discussion on trying to speak to younger gamers or do a promotional push towards different gamers.

I dont like the constant virtue signaling with this printing. Let the bears pay the bear tax I'll pay the Homer tax.

Quote from: Doc Sammy;923725I agree with you on that, but as long as the S&W core game remains the same content-wise, I really don't care if the developers put on idiotic covers and attempt to pander to the SJW crowd.

I don't care about a D&D retroclone at all but I can understand why some people might find this sort of thing annoying and say so.

Quote from: yosemitemike;923732I don't care about a D&D retroclone at all but I can understand why some people might find this sort of thing annoying and say so.

Fair point

I posted on the update over on Kickstarter and have a feeling I'll get murdered in the comments

Quote from: yosemitemike;923724I never thought about the genders of the people in the credits listing to begin with.  I barely looked at them at all.  If I had looked, I would not have concluded that the hobby was somehow less for women if I didn't see enough female names.  I don't understand this mindset to begin with.  If there aren't enough in the credits listing for games that means the games aren't for women and female players are somehow excluded from the hobby?  What?  Do you go through a game book, count the number of people who seem to have the same plumbing as you based on their names and then conclude it's not for you and you are excluded from participating in that game if that number isn't high enough?  Does anyone beyond a few identity politics obsessed SJW types do this?    Do women go through credits, count people with female names and think, "This is not for me.  I am excluded" if they don't count enough of them?  Is this really an issue at all?.

You are reading way too much into my post. It had nothing to do with looking through the credits and tallying the number of women. I always read the credits because the best way to find good books was to find the names of people who wrote stuff you like, then look for more of their stuff. Some of the big names when Ravenloft was out were, we female. My point was, at the time, since it was mostly guys I was gaming with, seeing women's names on the cover made it seem like it was a hobby that probably appealed to plenty of women as well. When I first got into the hobby, it seriously didn't occur to many of us that women played because most of the groups we saw were all guys (that changed about midway through highshool).

S&W is a dying product. The need to buy generic fantasy clones set in a generic fantasy world has passed. This latest KS for an SjW version is a shameless, desperate attempt reinvigorate it via identity politics (or at least milk it one last time before it's put out of its misery).

Also, the cover sucks because... wait for it... the cover sucks. Doesn't have anything to do with the artist's plumbing.

Quote from: S'mon;923600That seems fair enough - so then it's a way to get SJW inclined gamers (mostly male, I suspect) to give the company some money, for very little work.

Exactly. I have seen S&W many times before, but it hasn't caught my attention like LotFP or DCC RPG for example, both of which have put particularly strong stamps on the same basic system. But my group actually had a fairly long discussion about S&W primarily because of the cover. That counts for something.

I don't like the cover, but I don't think the cover of any game has ever made a difference in how it plays.

Quote from: Wraith;923747S&W is a dying product.

This doesn't ring particularly true to me. I am assuming a lot of the strong reactions to the cover are because people like the line. When I asked around several months back for a good all purpose retroclone, S&W was the one that consistently came up across all camps. And I don't think retroclones themselves are dead.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;923750This doesn't ring particularly true to me. I am assuming a lot of the strong reactions to the cover are because people like the line. When I asked around several months back for a good all purpose retroclone, S&W was the one that consistently came up across all camps. And I don't think retroclones themselves are dead.

I didn't say it was a dying game, but I'm not sure it has much life left as a product that people will buy. You can get the previous PDF for free (http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/86546/Swords-and-Wizardry-Complete-Rule-Book) and print it yourself, at home or more professionally. Same exact text and game content as the SjW version. For what it's worth, the Otus version KS raised almost twice the money as the SjW version at this point in its campaign. Check Kicktraq.

Quote from: Wraith;923751I didn't say it was a dying game, but I'm not sure it has much life left as a product that people will buy. You can get the previous PDF for free (http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/86546/Swords-and-Wizardry-Complete-Rule-Book) and print it yourself, at home or more professionally. Same exact text and game content as the SjW version. For what it's worth, the Otus version KS raised almost twice the money as the SjW version at this point in its campaign. Check Kicktraq.

I am not saying this Kickstarter is more successful than previous ones they've done (no idea how this project has been recieved across the board). It may well be this new cover fails to bring in more new people than the people it loses (again, no idea). I just don't think it is a dying line. Having stuff up for free just means they are probably treating the core game content as a loss leader.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;923752I am not saying this Kickstarter is more successful than previous ones they've done (no idea how this project has been recieved across the board). It may well be this new cover fails to bring in more new people than the people it loses (again, no idea). I just don't think it is a dying line. Having stuff up for free just means they are probably treating the core game content as a loss leader.

Suit yourself! :)

Quote from: Lynn;923748I don't like the cover, but I don't think the cover of any game has ever made a difference in how it plays.

I don't know, sound like a fun experiment that will never happen: I think a lot of people would be subtly influenced into running the exact same generic fantasy system differently if it had the following covers:

http://www.paintinghere.com/Uploadpic/Emanuel%20Gottlieb%20Leutze/big/The%20Knight%20Of%20Sayn%20And%20The%20Gnomes.jpg

vs

http://orig02.deviantart.net/b7f6/f/2012/322/3/d/evil_knight_by_mclovin216-d5lf3f5.jpg

I think S&W Lite will do more to push the game to new players than a reprint of the core rules.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;923744You are reading way too much into my post. It had nothing to do with looking through the credits and tallying the number of women. I always read the credits because the best way to find good books was to find the names of people who wrote stuff you like, then look for more of their stuff. Some of the big names when Ravenloft was out were, we female. My point was, at the time, since it was mostly guys I was gaming with, seeing women's names on the cover made it seem like it was a hobby that probably appealed to plenty of women as well. When I first got into the hobby, it seriously didn't occur to many of us that women played because most of the groups we saw were all guys (that changed about midway through highshool).

That idea is a common rationale though.    

It would have never occurred to me to think that the hobby only appealed to guys just because the handful of people I knew were all guys.  Seeing a female name on a game book was no surprise to me and made no particular impression.  It's not like the fantasy genre didn't have lots of female authors.  Seeing a woman's name on a fantasy book as the author was no great surprise or new thing.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;923637I'd be curious on some real numbers here simply because I am a slowly turning into a dinosaur myself and am probably a bit out of touch with what is going on in the gaming community. From my vantage point, I feel like the 90s was a highpoint in terms of the number of female gamers and the number of female creators. Locally, it seems to me that there are fewer female gamers (but my perspective is pretty limited).

I actually remember there being a ton of women designing for lines like Ravenloft in the early 90s (Andria Heyday, Lisa Smedman, Teeuwynn Woodruff, Anne Brown, etc). Lisa Smedman wrote a bunch of stuff as I recall. I haven't counted the numbers but I think something approaching half the books were written by women (maybe more if you include the novels).

   Probably closer to a third, but still a higher proportion than the typical TSR line. The novel line was almost 50-50, IIRC, and it launched Christie Golden's career--she's gone on to a lot of high-profile shared-world stuff. The line was also run by female editors for most of the latter half of its run--Cindi Rice took over from after the Grim Harvest to the end of the TSR line, and after a couple of books under "Kelly Jester", the WW line was helmed (nominally) by Nicky Rea & Jackie Cassada.

QuoteWhether that caused more women to join the hobby, no idea. I think for me, as a guy in high school it probably made me feel like women were more a part of the hobby than if the names on the books were all men, but not sure). I would agree though, people not being jerks to new players are the best way to make sure any group feels welcome (and over the years, this is something I've definitely seen gamers do to lots of people).

  TSR's 1994 catalog claimed that Ravenloft did have a higher number of female fans than the typical AD&D setting.

But will guys still guy this game, even if they already own previous editions of it? And is there a demographic of women out there that have been waiting for an all-girl-produced RPG to be made, that even know or care about crap game mechanics, and are too cheap to just buy TSR games?

Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;923763But will guys still guy this game, even if they already own previous editions of it? And is there a demographic of women out there that have been waiting for an all-girl-produced RPG to be made, that even know or care about crap game mechanics, and are too cheap to just buy TSR games?

Kickstarter says "yes. apparently"

A quick spin through the "who backed this project" gallery revealed one woman out of the first 30+ backers.

Quote from: daniel_ream;923769A quick spin through the "who backed this project" gallery revealed one woman out of the first 30+ backers.

But how mainstream  and young are those 29 dudes? ;)

Quote from: daniel_ream;923769A quick spin through the "who backed this project" gallery revealed one woman out of the first 30+ backers.

Again, most of this 'inclusiveness of women' shit isn't really women screaming about it.  It's some pathetic neckbeard desperately trying to get laid.  

About as honest and respectable as a windowless van with 'free candy' parked near a playground (I keep saying this, because it's true).

Absolutely nothing has stopped women from creating- except, of course, people saying that women have been stopped from creating.

Quote from: Ddogwood;923325I pledged on it because the OSR needs more women creators.

The fact that it pisses you off is just icing on the cake.

You threw your actual money into something because you honestly think gender has any relevance whatsoever on a product's quality, and because you believe people 'hate' women creators?

Well, it's your money.  But I can honestly say that I don't make enough of it just to 'support' a creator, especially not because of what they've got between their legs.  I'm buying products, not donating to a cause.

Quote from: ArrozConLeche;923770But how mainstream  and young are those 29 dudes? ;)

We all know this was never about the "younger and more mainstream" audience.

Stacy managed to successfully con FGG into giving her and her friends a decent paying job to produce sub-par work.  Nice gig if you can get it.

Quote from: ArrozConLeche;923770But how mainstream  and young are those 29 dudes? ;)

What? That vs. how many are SJW dudes who just pledged in order to wave their flag?
How many are S&W faithful who don't need a new book but supported it to support the game, much as some of us did with the GURPS kickstarter despite not having much interest in Dungeon Fantasy?

Will FGG ever know? Will it ever matter?

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;923755I don't know, sound like a fun experiment that will never happen: I think a lot of people would be subtly influenced into running the exact same generic fantasy system differently if it had the following covers

Especially true if one of the rules was that when your character verbally communicates - they can only sing!

Quote from: Lynn;923748Exactly. I have seen S&W many times before, but it hasn't caught my attention like LotFP or DCC RPG for example, both of which have put particularly strong stamps on the same basic system. But my group actually had a fairly long discussion about S&W primarily because of the cover. That counts for something.

I don't like the cover, but I don't think the cover of any game has ever made a difference in how it plays.

I've always found S&W rather bland compared to Dan Proctor's Labyrinth Lord, which I've played and GM'd a lot, or BFRPG which I use for the tons of great adventures. I like how LL is both a pretty strict clone, but also the property of a singular vision. My actual current old school campaign though uses Mentzer BECM (& the RC for reference).

Quote from: daniel_ream;923624When people talk about "not enough X do Y", my reaction is always "define 'enough'".  At what point is this problem "solved"?

Here's the problem I've been noticing of late, it never is enough or solved.  Simply because, the moment it is, then whatever group is pushing for 'enough' will have to move on, find something else, and most people don't want to do that.  Because that would require them to change.  And change, is evil.

Quote from: Crüesader;923772Absolutely nothing has stopped women from creating- except, of course, people saying that women have been stopped from creating.

Right. Its kinda pathetic listening to all the claims that theres no women in gaming or design or art or whatever and then you glance around and see... drumroll please... lots of.

Back in the mid 90s Susan Van Camp did this and did it better. Dragon Storm attracted a huge number of female players. All without even once crowing about how it was designed by a woman and how many women artists worked on it. The RPG stood on its own merits. And it hung in there for nearly 20 years and would probably still be around if Mark hadnt passed away. And Susan did it with this simple starter.

(http://i.ebayimg.com/images/a/T2eC16VHJIYE9qUcNklRBQMWh41L!g~~/s-l300.jpg)

Well, here's my thoughts  (http://therpgpundit.blogspot.com/2016/10/the-all-woman-swords-wizardry-printing.html)on the subject.

Quote from: Baulderstone;923587It seems a real stretch to see this as extortion. Who is being extorted?

It wasn't extortion at all. First, it was Frog God's idea. If anything, it's a cynical attempt at one last gasp at making money off a rule-set that is largely irrelevant as it no longer fits a need in the OSR today.

Second, the people involved aren't some kind of outsiders; at least, the women I recognize from the project are bona fide gamers.

Quote from: Kravell;923633The unified art appeals to me. I like DCC with its retro art

DCC's retro-art is not the same as S&W and other Clonemania product's blatant-TSR-nostalgia art. Very different things.

Quote from: S'mon;923722Ah... light bulb moment... now I understand Stacy's "Why does the OSR hate women?" comment (paraphrasing!). :D The SJW movement absolutely cannot allow any havens, any neutral Tanelorns. Once the OSR was identified as a haven it had to be attacked.

Jesus Christ. Trying to blacklist OSR games (or designers) is an attack. This is not an attack. As I pointed out on my blog, it's not even up to snuff of the real avant-garde of the OSR. The interior art and layout is, I think, really good stuff artistically speaking, but it would fit on the tame side of stuff LotFP has been doing for years now. It's not nearly as avant-garde as a lot of OSR products that have been out for a couple of years now.

Quote from: Simlasa;923774What? That vs. how many are SJW dudes who just pledged in order to wave their flag?
How many are S&W faithful who don't need a new book but supported it to support the game, much as some of us did with the GURPS kickstarter despite not having much interest in Dungeon Fantasy?

Will FGG ever know? Will it ever matter?

It was a tongue in cheek riff on what I was replying to. How many of those 29 dudes became a realization of the purported goal of bringing the game to the mainstream and/or young set. I don't think it matters, since it's been funded beyond its monetary goal, and that should be a success by any measure.

Quote from: RPGPundit;923824Well, here's my thoughts  (http://therpgpundit.blogspot.com/2016/10/the-all-woman-swords-wizardry-printing.html)on the subject.

Well there is your ludicrous assertion that there is or was ever a OSR Taliban. Dude, there is no fucking OSR Taliban, all there   ever was is you and Stuart getting into a pissing match over your respective RPGs. Yes Stuart started it by dissing Forward to Adventure. But by the end of the exchange neither one of you did yourselves and favors. The only person that keeps that old enmity alive at this point is you.

At no time either through mental mindshare, or control of a distribution was there ever a chokepoint in the OSR where one group had metaphorical "keys to the gate". Yes the guys behind OSRIC are about preserving AD&D 1st edition 'as is' as close they can legally can. But the way they went about that was through the re-purposing of the open content of the d20 SRD. Jason Vey with Basic Fantasy also did the same thing with Basic Fantasy and with the two as an example meant the gate was flung open for everybody. Then came along Lulu and now it encompassed physical books.

So I ask, so what really is the fucking problem. So what people like to do retro-clone and emulate old TSR trade dress. That the point of the freedom offered by open content. To do whatever it is you want with it. That freedom encompasses  Dark Albion, Lamentation of the Flame Princess, Vornheim, Majestic Wilderlands, and yes Swords & Wizardry.

In the past I know you been perplexed by my defense of those you label as OSR Taliban. It is because I value that freedom, I don't give two shits what other people consider to be creative and progress. What I care about that EVERYBODY has the opportunity to realize their vision if they want to put the work in. I am intensely interested in ways that makes that process affordable in terms of time and resources. And when I find something useful I will talk about it to let other folks know. When I can I will pitch in help like I did with the maps for Arrows of Indra.

Also to make this point fucking crystal clear, slavishly recreating old games is not my thing. What I am interested in is sandbox campaigns and all that goes with prepping and managing them along with presenting my Majestic Wilderlands. I march to the beat of my own drummer thank you.

I am passionate about this stuff, in part because it greatly benefits me. I know exactly why I can publish the things I want to publish. And it isn't because of people like Raggi, Zak S, you, or me trying to push old-school innovation. It because of open content, print on demand, and the Internet. Above all it because a bunch of folks figured to use those things resurrect beloved old games in a way that was both legal and that it could be built on.

You shouldn't be condemning those who you call the OSR Taliban, you should be thanking them that they laid groundwork that you took advantage of for Arrows of Indra and Dark Albion. I do, without the work of Matt Finch, Jason Vey, and Stuart Marshall and their respective teams, Majestic Wilderlands, Blackmarsh, and the rest probably would not have existed. So fuck ya, I  thank them for being obstinate clonemanic pseudo-nostalgic bastards about the issue. And I hope OSRIC, Swords & Wizardry, Basic Fantasy, Labynith Lord and the rest enjoy many more reprintings in the future. In the meantime I will keep doing my thing and when I can help other do their thing.

As for the S&W Kickstarter, from my point of view it is a good thing. I don't care if it all-female team. What makes me happy is that this group of people got an opportunity and that a good thing in my book. And I hope they make the most of it.

Again, not a fan of the cover for D&D (like I said in the other thread before gender came into it), but the interior art looks cool and the borders I think are flavorful as fuck.  If nothing else, makes it super easy to flip-to-chapter.  Not really in the market for a physical copy of S&W, but if I was, I'd probably get this one, although I'd prefer the Rick Sardinha cover.
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-rz-Q4hbmcjg/UPSt9fA9bRI/AAAAAAAADCQ/g-5GfkARo7o/s1600/SWCR+cover.jpg)

Quote from: estar;923842As for the S&W Kickstarter, from my point of view it is a good thing. I don't care if it all-female team.

I would venture to say no one cares that the artists are all women, but lots of people dislike the accompanying idea that somehow an all-female team magically has a better ability to appeal to everyone than one of all men or one of mixed genders. It's really stupid and hypocritical, but if you're doing an SjW version of S&W, I guess you can't avoid looking stupid and hypocritical.

Also, as someone who likes to write notes in the margins of RPG books, the borders, no matter how great, are a pain in the ass. That's real estate that could have had my notes.

Quote from: Wraith;923848I would venture to say no one cares that the artists are all women, but lots of people dislike the accompanying idea that somehow an all-female team magically has a better ability to appeal to everyone than one of all men or one of mixed genders. It's really stupid and hypocritical, but if you're doing an SjW version of S&W, I guess you can't avoid looking stupid and hypocritical.

To be fair, I don't think it's as much that an all women crew is somehow magically going to draw the young'uns (unless they're coming for the social justice), but I think it's that the specifically TSR-Retro look might NOT draw the young'uns, who might not buy something new simply because it looks old.

Now, how that applies to women, whether there were more or less women as a percentage of gamers in the 80's, 90's, 00's, and 10's I don't really think anyone has good stats for, it's all anecdotal based on what city you were in at the time and what game you were playing.  The "common wisdom" says "Of course there are, duh, Felicia Day."  While I think you can definitely draw a customer line from Tabletop RPGs to Boardgames, Videogames, Cardgames, literature and movies, drawing the relationship going the other way has always been tenuous at best (otherwise Green Ronin would be in total Strippers and Blow territory having licenses for both the Dragon Age videogame and Song of Ice and Fire novels).

So while console and videogames have a way higher percentage of women then they used to, tabletop RPGs always had a higher percentage of women I think, based on my own anecdotal experience. Maybe they are right and the idea "the game written by middle-aged white guys in the style of middle-aged white guy games will magically draw in someone other than an middle-aged white guys when given a new coat of paint by non-middle aged white non-guys" will pan out, but while I don't think you're gonna see an influx of new blood, I'm not sure there's enough SJW Ideology in it to be really harmful.

Quote from: Wraith;923848Also, as someone who likes to write notes in the margins of RPG books, the borders, no matter how great, are a pain in the ass. That's real estate that could have had my notes.

Tru dat, I used to write super-small in the margins of all my books, but my eyes don't let me do that anymore, and I use OneNote for damn near everything.

Quote from: Wraith;923848I would venture to say no one cares that the artists are all women, but lots of people dislike the accompanying idea that somehow an all-female team magically has a better ability to appeal to everyone than one of all men or one of mixed genders. It's really stupid and hypocritical, but if you're doing an SjW version of S&W, I guess you can't avoid looking stupid and hypocritical.

Interesting distinction. I think you're right.

Quote from: RPGPundit;923830Jesus Christ. Trying to blacklist OSR games (or designers) is an attack. This is not an attack.

I meant SD's "Why does the OSR have a problem with women?" statement from a while back. It was a verbal attack. OK it's not on the level of "Clyde Caldwell must never work in this industry again!" type SJW stuff.

Quote from: Wraith;923848I would venture to say no one cares that the artists are all women, but lots of people dislike the accompanying idea that somehow an all-female team magically has a better ability to appeal to everyone than one of all men or one of mixed genders.

My view is for those who feel that way, they need to chill. People and project participants get enthusiastic regardless if it was a all-women team, an all-Antarctica team, or if their first major project.  Can enthusiasm get annoying sure. But what the alternative? Not to be enthusiastic and bubbly about your project? Everybody got their style when it comes to hype including me. Compounding this is the fact that Frog God Games is a OSR publisher with a lot of visibility. I don't view the hype around this any different than what other folks have done for their projects.

This stuff tends to be self correcting in the long run especially with the way sales are being handled these days with the internet. It very for a person to take their business elsewhere. If they don' t live up to the hype, then their next project will be ignored. If they do live up the hype or get within the ballpark at least, then they will find they can do bigger and better projects.

From what I can see right now my opinion the artists that did the interior art will have offers now because of the exposure. I think their work is very nice.  The rest will have to wait until PDFs and physical books are in people's hand.

Quote from: estar;923854Can enthusiasm get annoying sure. But what the alternative? Not to be enthusiastic and bubbly about your project?

The alternative is to quietly put together your all-woman team and try your promising new aesthetic without loudly, smugly drawing attention to those things rather than the product's own merits.

I won't stop anyone from being "enthusiastic and bubbly" about their very public ideological gender segregation gimmick that they are trying to pretend isn't any such thing, but I'm not going to cheer along and I'm not going to feel bad about soft mockery on a pointless thread on a minor forum.

Quote from: estar;923854My view is for those who feel that way, they need to chill. People and project participants get enthusiastic regardless if it was a all-women team, an all-Antarctica team, or if their first major project.  Can enthusiasm get annoying sure. But what the alternative? Not to be enthusiastic and bubbly about your project? Everybody got their style when it comes to hype including me. Compounding this is the fact that Frog God Games is a OSR publisher with a lot of visibility. I don't view the hype around this any different than what other folks have done for their projects.

I am all for clever marketing, and I think this is clever marketing. An 'all-x' team certainly can be good for promotion ("your meatless meal prepared by an all vegan staff"). But when the form of promotion is based around a negative quality in your market base (sexist, exclusionary competitors and sexist, exclusionary customers), it isn't quite the same thing as a promotion that easily and demonstrably adds additional or unique value. There is obviously a risk in this type of promotion, and if they take it on the chin as a result then they should have reasonably expected it - much like you would in any vs competition marketing campaign.

Quote from: RPGPundit;923824Well, here's my thoughts  (http://therpgpundit.blogspot.com/2016/10/the-all-woman-swords-wizardry-printing.html)on the subject.

You missed the fact that some are just annoyed with the proclamations. You can be enthusiastic for your project without trumpeting whatever non-game related gimmick you are using. Similar happened with HeroQuest 25th when the designers started pushing Spanish nationalism. Or how some in the OSR annoy you yourself with their antics.

Quote from: One Horse Town;923454I'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. :D

'You know,' she said, beginning to go red. 'A man's... um, you know. Not even very much like, um, you know, too. I mean, you had to want to see a... um, you know... there, if you understand me.'

Quote from: daniel_ream;923697I'm sure they had no agenda whatsoever.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]440[/ATTACH]

Supergirl started out shitty. Just saying.

Question though.
Who is doing more (or all) of the crowing about the "all women" part?
Contessa? FGG? the SJW?

Quote from: TristramEvans;923327Wait , they went from these awesome covers...
...to a picture of a shrivelled vagina?

I guess Georgia O'Keeffe and Carroll Dunham weren't available to paint a cover.

Quote from: daniel_ream;923334

• Claim X is problematic
• Stir up Internet Outrage Machine against X
• Tell X things would be better if only they hired unproblematic accuser to fix things
• Profit

...is such a common con that I'm surprised anyone is still falling for it.

+1 this

Quote from: Gwarh;923919+1 this

Though it seems like +1 this didnt happen?

Sounds more like FGG contacted Contessa and then played it up?

Quote from: darthfozzywig;923500Would have been funnier if they made the ampersand in S&W look like a "J".

HUGE +1 to this

Quote from: RPGPundit;923826First, it was Frog God's idea.

I keep seeing people say this, but I am 100% sure I read a post where Matt Finch said that Stacy reached out to him first. Yes, I realize the KS says "we engaged Stacy as a designer" and "We asked Stacy to put together an all-woman team," but I think that the original post that pre-dated these been scrubbed to be quite honest. I will keep looking.

I think some of the font and color choices are downright dire and the cover too abstract to communicate a brand identity, but that's about it. And honestly the cover wouldn't be that big a deal if people didn't keep making a big deal about it. Not like they used Poser art or anything.

Oh wait, this is about the politics, isn't it?

Quote from: TristramEvans;923327...to a picture of a shrivelled vagina?

...

can't...unsee... >_<

Quote from: TristramEvans;923544All that aside, the difference between good and bad art in an rpg specifically, from my personal POV, is whether the art is inspirational and either tells a story or presents a situation that draws one into the spirit or world of the game, technical ability aside.

Have to agree.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;923760TSR's 1994 catalog claimed that Ravenloft did have a higher number of female fans than the typical AD&D setting.

Wait, you mean the line with all the Clyde Caldwell art?

Quote from: Omega;923330Wouldnt it be better to, oh... I dont know... maybee add more GOOD creators? Rather than hiring someone based on their plumbing?

Yes, but many good creators are kept out of the market for superficial reasons. How can you address that while not going too far in creating opportunities specifically for them?

Quote from: jhkim;923359I expect, however, that controversy over the new artwork will generate a lot of discussion and attention and thus generate sales.

The heavy focus on the cover in the pitch suggests that's the intent.

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?

Sorta. At least you'll find far more women playing 'indie' RPGs than OSR titles if you peruse the actual plays on YouTube.

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;923619Amusingly, my mother is connected to the world of quilting and has mentioned that a small but influential influx of men into that hobby over the past decade has changed it... for the worse in her opinion. These men are apparently highly competitive and win a disproportionate number of quilting competitions. This then pushes everyone else to either become 'uncomfortably' competitive to keep up or withdraw a little from the scene.

Hard core gamers ruin everything :)

Seriously though, this is a perfect example of how people can change a culture through what they value and prioritize. For most women, knitting is a relaxing diversion that gives them a chance to socialize or disengage and make nice things for other people. I doubt the men you describe share the same priorities, and their participation actually does make those other priorities more difficult to achieve. It's like trying to RP on a PVP server.

Exclusion and boundaries are not prejudicial as long as everybody is getting what they want/need.

Quote from: Teodrik;923655Sure FGG have every right to do their businesses as they plearse, but blatantly say right in the face of their fans that people with their plumbing, age and sensibilities, even only implied, are from now on no longer a target group for the next rerelease of their in-house game is bound the get some disagreement.

That's not what they said at all. Please quote me where you're getting that.

Quote from: ArrozConLeche;923661The fact that the OP mixes the topic of hiring an all-female staff, and the topic of the quality and attractiveness of the cover muddles this conversation. Two different things that deserve their own consideration.

Can't blame the OP though, as FGG is kinda muddling that conversation themselves.

Quote from: yosemitemike;923724I never thought about the genders of the people in the credits listing to begin with.  I barely looked at them at all.  If I had looked, I would not have concluded that the hobby was somehow less for women if I didn't see enough female names.  I don't understand this mindset to begin with.

Neither do I, but it does have an effect.

Quote from: yosemitemike;923724Do women go through credits, count people with female names and think, "This is not for me.  I am excluded" if they don't count enough of them?  Is this really an issue at all?

Sadly it is.

Then again I also know white women who stalk black cosplayers to make sure they're black. So perhaps my sample group is a bit extreme.

Quote from: Ulairi;923728I'm canceling my pledge after the latest Kickstarter update. It's obvious to me that this is an identity politics play more than just a cool product. The reason I think this is because they sure are spending a lot of time talking about how progressive and how many barriers they are breaking down compared to any discussion on how they will actually reach new gamers, younger gamers, and more women.

Yes, and they're being exceedingly dishonest about it.

You don't put statements like "Unfortunately, we think there may be some controversy about the fact that the design team here is made up entirely of women." unless you're trying to court said controversy (if it exists at all) to leverage it. At the very least you make such statements at the end of your pitch. Then we're told how the project isn't about taking a political position in an update which is nothing but taking a political position (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/froggodgames/swords-and-wizardry-complete-rulebook-3rd-printing/posts/1701541).

It's rather maddening.

Quote from: Anon Adderlan;923955Neither do I, but it does have an effect.

How much of an effect on who?  If it slightly influences one person, it could be said to have an effect.    

Quote from: Anon Adderlan;923955Sadly it is.

Then again I also know white women who stalk black cosplayers to make sure they're black. So perhaps my sample group is a bit extreme.

Is it really or are there just some very vocal, identity politics obsessed people who want to make it one?

Quote from: estar;923842Well there is your ludicrous assertion that there is or was ever a OSR Taliban. Dude, there is no fucking OSR Taliban

And yet, for people who don't exist, they sure did a good job of spending much of last week fighting with me on Twitter and G+.

Quote from: S'mon;923852I meant SD's "Why does the OSR have a problem with women?" statement from a while back. It was a verbal attack. OK it's not on the level of "Clyde Caldwell must never work in this industry again!" type SJW stuff.

I think it was more of a legitimate question; the "problem with women" being actually a question about why weren't more women playing OSR games.

Quote from: Omega;923883You missed the fact that some are just annoyed with the proclamations.

Yes, there were some people who had that reaction.

QuoteSimilar happened with HeroQuest 25th when the designers started pushing Spanish nationalism.

Wait.. what?!

Quote from: RPGPundit;924007I think it was more of a legitimate question; the "problem with women" being actually a question about why weren't more women playing OSR games.

How do we know they arent?

Quote from: Omega;924009How do we know they arent?

Exactly.  There's a whole lot of question-begging going on.  I have yet to see any evidence that anyone but a vocal identity politics activist thinks there's a problem with the OSR.

I'd kind of like someone to do some metrics on this KS once it's completed, showing the percentage of female backers and backers under, say, 30 compared to their previous Kickstarters.

Surely if this marketing stunt is successful, FGG would want to trumpet the undoubtedly vast increase in those demographics.

Quote from: Anon Adderlan;923955You don't put statements like "Unfortunately, we think there may be some controversy about the fact that the design team here is made up entirely of women." unless you're trying to court said controversy (if it exists at all) to leverage it. At the very least you make such statements at the end of your pitch. Then Stacy tells us how the project isn't about taking a political position in an update which is nothing but taking a political position (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/froggodgames/swords-and-wizardry-complete-rulebook-3rd-printing/posts/1701541).

It's rather maddening.

To be fair, Update #3 was written by Greg Vaughn, Stacy had just linked to it on G+.

Also on G+ they were talking about how Venger Satanis and others were responding.  I posted this:

Quote from: meFirst, the interior art is just awesome.  You want to expand to new markets, you need new people, that's just a fact.  How a company gains new customers without alienating old ones is a question every business asks itself.  Since this game is 100% the same, only with different art, the shift could have been described as moving away from the "TSR Aesthetic", "1980's style art", etc.  It was not.  It was described specifically as trying to target someone other than "40 year old guys who've been gaming since forever".  If 40 year old guys who have been gaming since forever take that a little personally, well, you kind of poked them a little bit, didn't you?  "Making the OSR more than just nostalgia?"  Come on, if you're gonna take jabs, at least own it and not pretend to be shocked when people respond.  Shaking things up is good.  Pretending you're not trying to, isn't.

QuoteOct 6 2016

Girls Can Play Too!!

16 Comments
 
 Like
 32 likes
"NO GURLS ALOWED!"

It's the sign posted on pretty much every childhood clubhouse ever depicted in 20th-century media from Norman Rockwell to Saturday morning cartoons. Yeah, it's a cliche kind of fallen by the wayside now, but I grew up in the 20th century so it still strikes a chord with me. I and my friends in grade school did have a clubhouse (more of a commandeered tool shed really), and though it didn't have that sign it definitely shared that sentiment. Girls were gross, snakes and toads and slimy things were cool, and you confused the two at your own peril. Inevitably we grew out of that sort of thinking so that by junior high we had decided that maybe girls weren't quite so bad and by high school and college reached the conclusion that they were quite good really. We put a mindset aside and matured into adults that could see past our immediate insecurities towards the "strange and unfamiliar." It's all a part of growing up, really.

You know what else grew up in the 20th century? Roleplaying games. Dungeons & Dragons arrived on the scene in the mid-1970s, close on the heels of Chainmail before that, and proved to be one of those rare cases where there really was something new under the sun. Nothing quite like it had ever been seen before and, despite being a sort of niche hobby, proved to be extremely culturally influential. I was introduced to the game in 1979 and have been hooked ever since. But like the pre-adolescent boys many of us were, the game and the many derivatives it spawned had some awkward growing years, relegated to the shadowy corners of parent's basements, late-night dorm rooms, and the funny-smelling backrooms of bookstores.

 Its fans were dedicated because they had to be. When exposed to the light day (i.e. mass media, parent, and religious attention) it quickly became glossed over as nerdy, corrupting, promoting suicide and psychosis, or even Satanic! Ah, the 80s. How dull life would have been without Ninja Turtles and underground gaming...but I digress. My point is that for as pervasive as it became culturally, it was definitely having an awkward time fitting in. And while by no means does that mean that girls didn't ever play, it does mean that its core fan base was a mostly homogeneous shade of white, male, and possibly a little weird.

So why are we having this conversation? Is this new printing of the the Swords & Wizardry rulebook (a retroclone of the original 1970s iteration of the game, in case you're wondering) just a backlash against four decades (Four decades!?! Geez, I'm old.) of homogeneity? A way to stick it to the Man (in gaming terms)? Absolutely not.

I love the way Bill and Stacy and Matt put together the concept and explanation for this Kickstarter. This isn't to poke a stick in the eye of hardcore fans who are as old or nearly as old as I and have stuck with this hobby for all these years. This isn't to say thanks for playing, but we've moved on. By no means is that the case. When I look at Frog God Games I see me. It's people like me, like us. The old guys who have made this a part of our lives since the early days when it could mean getting laughed at in school or forbidden from playing by well-meaning parents scared by all the media attention over it or even now when it can mean confused looks by folks who have no idea what you're talking about or possibly derision from those who assume that playing this game means some sort of specific political or gender bias...again because of all the media attention.

But the game has grown; the fan base has grown; society has grown. We have to admit that there are terrible things said and done over the internet and that it has impacted the RPG industry. However you feel about issues like Gamergate, it was definitely a thing that occurred and did a whole lot more dividing than unifying. Sure that example was specifically regarding the video game industry, but most of the world wouldn't really even know to differentiate between the video game and a tabletop roleplaying game industries. There is certainly a lot of crossover in the market.

For a game specifically designed around group interaction, collective imagining, and teamwork, the industry hasn't always gone out of its way to foster those sorts of things. We too easily fall into the familiar, into our comfort zones, and forget that there's a universe beyond those borders. And tabletop roleplaying may be an awesome thing for a lot of people out in that larger universe too who, for myriad reasons, may not even be aware of its existence.

Being richer in diversity than in uniformity has been shown in everything from genetics to the stock market. It's true for gaming too. You can make new friends without kicking out or stomping all over the old. The world we live in tries to put everything into a binary: good/evil, bad/good, right/wrong, new/old. I'm not going to try and say that binaries don't exist, but a lot of binaries are put in place because it's just easier to keep track of or form an opinion on something if it can be polarized into opposite camps. Well, I can assure you that the 3rd printing of the Swords & Wizardry rulebook is not in the binary business. Heck, as a company Frog God Games won't even make a statement about a "best" game system; we produce our game books under three different rule systems (Swords & Wizardry is just one of them) because we believe its about the shared experience, and our goal from the beginning has been to reach as many gamers as possible regardless of their favorite form of the game.

So this Kickstarter -- this project -- isn't about taking a political position or initiating gender wars or telling someone what to like or how to play a game or what sort of style and format makes a game book better or worse; each of you will have your own opinions on that. Rather it's about raising a flag that says, "Hey! There's a cool game here! Come check it out; buy the book; heck, even download the rules for free if you like." And when you raise a flag for a new group of onlookers if it looks just like the flag that you've always raised, then whatever preconceived notions they may already have will remain intact. But if the flag looks different, well then it might garner a second look.

The clubhouse is here. It hasn't had the "No Gurls" sign on it for many, many years. Maybe it never did. But the perceived notion of the sign has been there for a long time in much of the public subconscious, right or wrong, fair or unfair. So with this project we're putting an actual sign on our clubhouse. A new sign that may be saying something that was true since the beginning but hadn't always been communicated well to the uninitiated:

"Everybody welcome! Come on in and play."

Greg Vaughan, Frog God Games

So...it's advertising copy. It doesn't offend me in any way, It doesn't raise my hackles regarding SJW horribleness or anything, but it doesn't sell me on the game, which is fine, because as I said before , I know I'm not the target audience. I've expressed my doubts already that this is actually really an issue outside of the perceptions of some online reactionists, but I've nothing against a game either attempting to be "inclusive" or targeting a specific demographic that I'm not a part of. The only critique it raises from me is that I simply don't see how having an all-girl artistic team will actually draw in a female audience that otherwise wouldn't be incline towards this sort of game. Yeah, I think the cover is kinda schlock 90s throwback pseudo-avant garde, but the inside art looks just fine - just no different from the inside art of any 100s of other fantasy RPGs done by men or mixed gender artists. Is the novelty of the artist's gender in some way a draw for women? I can't say.

In general I just can't stand advertising copy, because I hate pandering. Invoking gamergate? Bringing up some "No girls allowed" clubhouse tropes that haven't been relevant since The Little Rascals? It all just kinda makes me roll my eyes. But advertising works (on most people anyways), so I can't really criticise whatever their choice for the most effective way they can pimp their game.

I disagree with the assertion of Pundit and other's that the older covers were only liked by people, "because they looked old". There is no nostalgia element for me in that regard; I didn't play OD&D or AD&D until after 2nd edition came out. Nostalgia for me would be John Blanche, Elmore, or Caldwell. I found these covers engaged my imagination because 1) they portray a feeling of a fantasy world that is unique in comparison to almost any other fantasy RPG on the shelves these days, 2) they actually show fantasy type people of the non-anime or superheroic variety having adventures in a fantasy environment, and 3) though the style is simplistic (one could even say crude), it evokes the feeling of old fairy tales and fantasy from a simpler time, resembling nothing so much as the sort of illustrations that might have graced the pages of a collection of Hans Christian Anderson or Tolkien's original illustrations for The Hobbit.

But those covers still exist, if I wanted to I could go out and grab the game with those covers. An I won't. Because I have no interest in the system.

Anyways, if there's much "outrage" going on regarding this topic, it doesn't seem to be taking place in this thread. I don't use google+ so I'm probably missing out on all the juicy  bits.

Quote from: Anon Adderlan;923955Then again I also know white women who stalk black cosplayers to make sure they're black. .

um....what do they do when they catch them?

QuoteOct 6 2016

Girls Can Play Too!!

Greg Vaughan, Frog God Games

They already were, you fucking retard.

(http://www.reactiongifs.us/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/rolling_eyes_neil_degrasse_tyson.gif)

This is a condesending, participation award on the vaginas of "girl gamers" for showing up.

Quote from: Anon Adderlan;923955It's rather maddening.

They're definitely generating controversy on purpose.  Here's an article titled "The Changing Face of the OSR" (http://initiativeone.blogspot.com/2016/10/the-changing-face-of-osr.html)

Quote from: linked article with cover pics removedYesterday the Swords & Wizardry Complete 3rd Printing Kickstarter launched. For reasons there has been talk about its cover:

The cover is a major departure from the last printing, which featured an Erol Otus original:

The Otus cover speaks strongly to me, but the change has me reflecting on the change in the OSR. We've gone from the original Labyrinth Lord:

To the art book that is Maze of the Blue Medusa:

Okay, that's enough showing pictures. I think it illustrates the basic point, which is that there is a shift afoot in the OSR away from old TSR and toward a very different and current aesthetic.

As much as I like the Otus cover for S&W Complete, it's a cover that ties the game back to TSR. As much as it's a fresh piece, it has intentional echoes of the cover for the Moldvay Basic box - and that leaves it in what is now effectively the OSR's past. Fewer and fewer OSR modules feel the need to consciously emulate TSR's look and feel, and Lamentations of the Flame Princess has been the leader here.

By severing the TSR connection, Swords & Wizardry has a chance to be its own game. I think that's particularly important for S&W to move forward, since effectively Frog God has just treated it as one of several options along with Pathfinder and 5e D&D. It doesn't have a strong identity, and if it could gain one outside of bog-standard fantasy, I think that would be a wonderful thing.

Look at the Kickstarter, by the way - the layout of the book is also getting a radical overhaul. I'm most excited for monster illustrations by Gennifer Bone, the artist who worked with Rafael Chandler on Lusus Naturae. Gennifer is one of the most exciting artists in the OSR right now, and I'd recommend you back her on Patreon.

It's kind of a funny coincidence to me that my recent game, set in the megadungeon I am slowly working on, used Swords & Wizardry Complete. More than any other OSR system, S&W really benefits from a strong vision on the referee's part, and I think giving the book a new look and adventures outside of the Gygaxo-Arnesonian tradition is a move toward that. LotFP, after all, is not far off from B/X D&D in the text of the rules but the actual play experience is far different. I'd like to see where Swords & Wizardry can go.

Stacy linked to this article like so: "Coverage! On making the OSR more than just nostalgia."  Nowhere in that article is the word nostalgia.  The author is talking about moving away from the TSR aesthetic so that the S&W rules can get their own identity like Pathfinder, etc...  Nowhere in that article is there the idea that "up to now, the OSR was just nostalgia, but now here comes the new version that makes it about more than that."

When people complained about the line, Stacy said to take it up with the author of the article.  A little disingenuous I think, because the "synopsis" is clearly not the same idea conveyed by the article, that meaning was wholly invented by Stacy.

So again, poking the hornet's nest to gain traction with the anti-OSR crowd, while denying that's what they're doing.

Quote from: RPGPundit;923824Well, here's my thoughts  (http://therpgpundit.blogspot.com/2016/10/the-all-woman-swords-wizardry-printing.html)on the subject.

Damn, that's some amazing interior art.

Which makes the vague, unevocative cover all the more frustrating.

Quote from: The Butcher;924029Damn, that's some amazing interior art.

Which makes the vague, unevocative cover all the more frustrating.

Yeah the art is cool.  I found out a friend of mine was thinking about S&W, so I backed it to get him a copy.  I think he'll like it.

The more they explain, the more I would feel a little offended if I were a woman. It's funny how often explicit identity politics insults its supposed beneficiaries the process of 'helping'.

Quote from: Greg VaughanMy point is that for as pervasive as it became culturally, it was definitely having an awkward time fitting in. And while by no means does that mean that girls didn't ever play, it does mean that its core fan base was a mostly homogeneous shade of white, male, and possibly a little weird.

Quote from: Greg VaughanThe old guys who have made this a part of our lives since the early days when it could mean getting laughed at in school or forbidden from playing by well-meaning parents scared by all the media attention over it or even now when it can mean confused looks by folks who have no idea what you're talking about or possibly derision from those who assume that playing this game means some sort of specific political or gender bias...again because of all the media attention.

Why am I uncomfortably reminded of the Little Red Hen? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Little_Red_Hen)

I mean, what he's basically saying and implying is...
Greg: "Back when this hobby started there was a social risk to participating in it, so of course it was mostly men. I mean that's only natural, amirite? Women are far less likely to take risks, especially social ones. So, now that most of the risk is gone we want to do more to encourage these shy, fragile, skittish creatures to participate."

Quote from: Greg VaughanHowever you feel about issues like Gamergate, it was definitely a thing that occurred and did a whole lot more dividing than unifying.

I'll give him credit for using a diplomatic tone here. He's actually taking a risk.

Quote from: Greg VaughanFor a game specifically designed around group interaction, collective imagining, and teamwork, the industry hasn't always gone out of its way to foster those sorts of things.

Unless he's using the words 'group interaction', 'collective imagining', and 'teamwork' as code for something else I have to strongly disagree that the industry hasn't gone out of its way to foster those sorts of things. Perhaps he confused the industry with the segment of consumers who have narrow preferences and closed groups?

Moving away from what Greg said for a moment to quote Tristram Evans:

Quote from: TristramEvansThe only critique it raises from me is that I simply don't see how having an all-girl artistic team will actually draw in a female audience that otherwise wouldn't be incline towards this sort of game.

You're right, unless you believe women are some vastly different alien species who just "do art" in ways that send out subtle female signals, none of the art we've seen in this book so far, nice as it is, would intrinsically draw new women specifically in. So the only draw must be...

Quote from: Greg VaughanAnd when you raise a flag for a new group of onlookers if it looks just like the flag that you've always raised, then whatever preconceived notions they may already have will remain intact. But if the flag looks different, well then it might garner a second look.

The 'flag' is not the nice-but-generic-fantasy art. The 'flag' is not the absolutely typical hack-and-slash game. Nothing so substantial. It's the loud announcement of SEGREGATED ALL-WOMAN TEAM!

Again, as a woman I would feel insulted. And as one of the MANY women who have already worked and been working in the industry for decades I'd perhaps feel a little bit erased by the implication that there's something significant about this.

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;924031Again, as a woman I would feel insulted. And as one of the MANY women who have already worked and been working in the industry for decades I'd perhaps feel a little bit erased by the implication that there's something significant about this.

There is a lot of erasure of women in identity politics. It's pretty fucking frustrating to see "opinion pieces" talking about women as if they just arrived on the planet yesterday.

Quote from: Ratman_tf;924039There is a lot of erasure of women in identity politics. It's pretty fucking frustrating to see "opinion pieces" talking about women as if they just arrived on the planet yesterday.

Yeah.  One of the first groups I actually gamed with as a teenager was mostly women.  Even my first FLGS where I was playing Warhammer Fantasy had women playing the game.  Still quite a bit at the places I go.  Not sure how that translates to creators, but I'm pretty sure I could find a few womens' names in the books.

Amazing, though- don't see many complaints about how few men there are writing for Cosmo.

Quote from: RPGPundit;923826First, it was Frog God's idea.

People keep saying this, but the Black Gate (https://www.blackgate.com/2016/10/05/modular-swords-wizardry-complete-kickstarter-explodes/#comments) recently reported that "Designer and RPGer Stacy Dellorfano had suggested to Finch that Frog God print a new version of the S&W rules, but with art and design done entirely by women. Within minutes, Finch and Bill Webb were on board and the project moved ahead." The KS itself only says that FG "engaged" her, which is not inconsistent with what Black Gate reported, and the Black Gate comments sound too specific not to have come straight from someone involved.

Also ran across this in the comments at Tenkar's Tavern back in May (http://www.tenkarstavern.com/2016/05/what-ever-happened-to-all-woman-team.html?m=1), Finch says, "Frog God doesn't have a political or social agenda here, although I'm sure Stacy and Chris see this project as having a beneficial approach in those terms."

Quote from: daniel_ream;924011Exactly.  There's a whole lot of question-begging going on.  I have yet to see any evidence that anyone but a vocal identity politics activist thinks there's a problem with the OSR.

I'd kind of like someone to do some metrics on this KS once it's completed, showing the percentage of female backers and backers under, say, 30 compared to their previous Kickstarters.

Surely if this marketing stunt is successful, FGG would want to trumpet the undoubtedly vast increase in those demographics.

I'd definitely be interested in seeing some hard numbers. I'm not sure they would say what you want them to say. You start by raising the question of whether FGG really believes there is a problem with OSR games reaching women. Then you suggest looking at hard numbers.

However, if this project fails to bring in women gamers, the doesn't prove or disprove whether their intentions were honest. It simply meant it failed to bring in women gamers. Did it fail to bring in women because women aren't drawn in by art by women? Did it fail because women aren't into S&W?

Also, if you dig into the backer demographics and find that hardly any women gamers are backing OSR products, doesn't that support Stacy's original premise that OSR games haven't done a great job of attracting women gamers?

I think Pundit overstates the case in saying the age of retroclones is over. My 10 year old nephew thinks his copy of Labyrinth Lord if pretty cool. It's definitely getting to be a pretty tapped out market though. FGG has to be running low on grognards to sell S&W to. I can't really see anything at all wrong with trying to find a new publicity tactic to keep selling the same old product to new people. I think it is pretty clever the way they have played guys like Spinchcat into promoting their game as well. I'm sure some of the pledges were driven by this thread. It's a smart play all around.

As for Stacy pulling some scam with this, she had to be the designer and hire the artists. I've had a friend that did RPG art direction and he aged like a US president while doing it. It's stressful work, not easy money. And speaking of the money, she is making RPG money. She would have made more money with the time and effort she put in if it had been applied in almost any other field. And as Pundit pointed out, there is some really nice art in there. She did a stressful job for in a low-paying field and did it well. Nothing about this feels like a scam for easy money. I find it hard to believe she would be putting in the time on this without at least some dedication to the product being made. Nobody is here to sponge off the lavish RPG gravy train.  

And, at the end of the day, it puts more money in FGGs pocket that they will turn around use towards their next product, which will probably be some safe, cozy OSR comfort food for the old folks to gum on. Just take your pills, have a nap, and there will be something along on Kickstarter that is more to your taste by the time you wake up.

Quote from: TristramEvans;923544All that aside, the difference between good and bad art in an rpg specifically, from my personal POV, is whether the art is inspirational and either tells a story or presents a situation that draws one into the spirit or world of the game, technical ability aside. The art presented here is technically adequate, but it doesn't lure me into the gameworld in any way.

This is pretty sensible to me. As a marketer, the purpose of a cover image, splash screen or whatever is the face of the product has to sell the product. It is entirely reasonable that a piece of work that isn't entirely abstract should, as closely as possible, be a good representation of the utility (use, feeling, experience) of the product. Relating to a game world / default campaign certainly fits with utility.

Also as a marketer, I think about how that face actually draws people to the product in a retail environment as well. A crisp, highly contrasting color image that draws the eye -- well, draws eyes! A dull, low contrast image, in which interesting details are lost because of color choices (and medium), leaving you with a sort of funny, unclear representation of what its supposed to be from 5'-10' away (depending on your need of eye ware) is a poor choice. You also have to consider that RPG books if displayed are going to appear next to each other, and if your book doesn't call attention to itself when compared to others, how likely is someone going to pick it up, unless they already know what the product is to begin with?

As an aside, in my first year in college, I was taking a creative writing course and a design course, and I suggested to both teachers that the design course did an image, and the creative writing course would write a story based on one of the images (so each artist would get matched to a writer). The end result was interesting, because most of the artists responded to the stories with "that's not what the image represents". They completely missed the point that the assignment had nothing to do with their personal therapy, and its not the viewer's job to 'figure out' what the artist is trying to communicate. A viewer arrives at conclusions based on what they see. If the viewer goes in another direction, it is the artist that fails.  Instructors in both classes were very clear about that. Whining that 'you are not educated enough to get what I am communicating' is an amateurish, narcissistic child squeal.

Over on Google+, Stacy said she didn't mean the "nostalgia" shot as deliberate, so I take her at her word.  I think a lot of us just might be a little too sensitive.  Not every change is an assault on all we hold dear about gaming, and everyone doesn't have a hidden agenda with every piece of ad copy.

Quote from: Baulderstone;924065I'm not sure they would say what you want them to say.

I don't want them to say anything.  I want to know what they do say.

QuoteHowever, if this project fails to bring in women gamers, the doesn't prove or disprove whether their intentions were honest. It simply meant it failed to bring in women gamers. Did it fail to bring in women because women aren't drawn in by art by women? Did it fail because women aren't into S&W?

There is an old saw in marketing that goes "I know 50% of my marketing budget is being wasted; I just don't know which 50%."  This is no longer true.  The tools and models exist to analyze what does and doesn't bring in customers with a high degree of accuracy.  If FGG were actually interested in determining what brings women into the hobby (also, apparently I'm the only one who noticed that the goalposts shifted from "women" to "women and younger, modern gamers" somewhere along the way), they could have done some simple A/B testing.  Let people pick new edition or Otis reprint when making their pledge.  From there, you know whether the new edition was worth it.

QuoteAlso, if you dig into the backer demographics and find that hardly any women gamers are backing OSR products, doesn't that support Stacy's original premise that OSR games haven't done a great job of attracting women gamers?

That's not her premise.  Her premise is that this is a problem that needs solving.  That's purely subjective.  What can be measured is whether this "solution" actually fixes anything.

And I'm not even getting into the subtleties of opportunity costs here.

QuoteShe would have made more money with the time and effort she put in if it had been applied in almost any other field.

I've seen her Linkedin history.  I think that's a debatable point.

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;924031Again, as a woman I would feel insulted.

The ne plus ultra of mansplaining.

Quote from: Black VulmeaThe ne plus ultra of mansplaining.

Dear Black Vulmea,

Dismissing my concerns about patronizing manipulative attitudes towards women with a blatantly sexist term. Nice.

You post here a half-dozen times since forever, and your two most recent contributions take either implicit or overt swipes at me. Why? What the fuck did I do to you?

No, never mind, better question, what's the point? Like you said in another thread, this site's too stupid for you now anyway, right? What possible good can come from poking a moron caveman inferior GM like me? A cheap dopamine rush? Is that the best use of your time?

Or wait, do you see this as some resounding blow for enlightened discourse or feminism? Like, thank goodness you were there on some shitty nothing forum full of idiots to swing in like a swashbuckling white knight and humiliate a neanderthal with a well-timed six-word post?

Fuck off Vulmea, You're wasting precious minutes of your life on people far beneath you. Go back to your rather excellent blog (and I'm honest about that, I've found it quite useful).

Or shit, come back and stick around just to spite me, whatever. We can trade barbs for a while and you will be the smug victor, get more of that sweet troll dopamine, and I'll leave the forum mildly irritated because it isn't worth fighting over. That'll feel real good, won't it? An excellent use of your time.

Curiously awaiting your nasty reply, evasion, or total disappearance,

- Shipyard Locked

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;924238. . . a bunch of shit not worth actually quoting . . .

(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/cf/c1/6f/cfc16ff1e485b9b62193db8a0e277d98.png)

I'm laughing my ass off right now, because you honestly believe I noticed it was you to whom I replied. I saw stupidity, I called it out as stupidity - to whom I responded wasn't remotely on my radar.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;924239I'm laughing my ass off right now, because you honestly believe I noticed it was you to whom I replied. I saw stupidity, I called it out as stupidity - to whom I responded wasn't remotely on my radar.

Wow, that was fast! You couldn't wait to get that confrontation dopamine rush. I understand, I'm feeling it too, though in a less sophisticated manner of course. It's funny to think we're kind of getting each other off, you making me feel the giddy exhilaration of a person who rarely fights anyone and me making your feel the warm smugness of a worldly veteran knight brushing off a contemptible inferior.

And look at that, you went to the trouble of grabbing an appropriate meme and replacing my quoted text with something mean too. You're still wasting your limited time on the likes of me! I'm flattered that as execrable an idiot as I is worthy of Black Vulmea's efforts! Shall we keep this going then? Come on white knight, you know you want the glory of chasing a Hillary Clinton voter off a site filled with Trump supporters and semi-closeted alt-righters. I promise I'll lose steam laughably fast!

I feel manshamed. I'm gonna go manspread in my mancave.

Man, wut?

Well...that got homoerotic fast

Quote from: TristramEvans;924252Well...that got homoerotic fast

Yeah, what can I say, I've got a fetish for sneering hypocritical sexist alpha geeks. My sap just gets going when I see gems of constructive discussion like:

Quote from: Black VulmeaY'know, I think nerfing spells like teleport, divination, fly and such is the shit-ass referee's way of covering for their own lack of imagination and tactical skill.

"LOL, learn 2 play noob!"

Quote from: Black VulmeaOver the past three years the level of abject stupid on this site broke whatever gawddamned meter you use to measure abject stupid. Then it rebuilt the meter with chewing gum and packing tape and broke it again, only harder the second time, like dropping a cargo container ship on it, and then nuking the meter and the ship from orbit, 'cause it's the only way to be sure.

See you in the funny pages.

"See you right here soon enough because I can't seem to actually quit you awful troglodytes."

Quote from: Black VulmeaIt beats the shit out of half the stuff churned out by fat-ass game designers who spent their formative years in their moms' basements.

"Not like me, a real fucking man and noble internet warrior who runs pirate and cowboy pretend games and writes copious amounts about it. Heck, my superiority is obvious from my devastatingly witty application of carefully dredged up pre-fab internet memes alone."

Quote from: Black Vulmea;924231The ne plus ultra of mansplaining.

Did you just use 'mansplaining' in a serious context?  You know, the only guys that get behind this shit are the dudes willing to do anything for female attention, even sacrifice their own logic and masculinity.  

And seriously, I noticed this:

Quote from: Black Vulmea;924231It beats the shit out of half the stuff churned out by fat-ass game designers who spent their formative years in their moms' basements.

...isn't this 'lol ur momz basement' thing a little old, a little 'SJW'?  

Actually, no- I want a poll:  Who has actually lived in their parents' basement, ever?  

The one dude I know that does live in his mom's basement is her legal caretaker and while she's in poor health, he runs a business from there.  He's actually a successful man that loves his mother and made sacrifices to keep her out of an assisted living home.

Quote from: Crüesader;924265Did you just use 'mansplaining' in a serious context?  You know, the only guys that get behind this shit are the dudes willing to do anything for female attention, even sacrifice their own logic and masculinity.  

And seriously, I noticed this:



...isn't this 'lol ur momz basement' thing a little old, a little 'SJW'?  

Actually, no- I want a poll:  Who has actually lived in their parents' basement, ever?  

The one dude I know that does live in his mom's basement is her legal caretaker and while she's in poor health, he runs a business from there.  He's actually a successful man that loves his mother and made sacrifices to keep her out of an assisted living home.

Crusader does that last quote even come from Black Vulmea (when I followed it, it just brought me to first post you quoted)?

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;924305Crusader does that last quote even come from Black Vulmea (when I followed it, it just brought me to first post you quoted)?

Yup, post 204 of the "Does anyone else hate niche protection?" thread.

In other words, fuck all to do with this thread.

Quote from: yosemitemike;923961How much of an effect on who?  If it slightly influences one person, it could be said to have an effect.    

Is it really or are there just some very vocal, identity politics obsessed people who want to make it one?

Fair enough. Those were some really lazy responses on my part.

Quote from: CRKrueger;924014To be fair, Update #3 was written by Greg Vaughn,

Well shit! Corrected.

I could have sworn it was a guest post but the name at the end is plain as day. How the hell did I miss that?

Quote from: Lynn;924083in my first year in college, I was taking a creative writing course and a design course, and I suggested to both teachers that the design course did an image, and the creative writing course would write a story based on one of the images (so each artist would get matched to a writer). The end result was interesting, because most of the artists responded to the stories with "that's not what the image represents". They completely missed the point that the assignment had nothing to do with their personal therapy, and its not the viewer's job to 'figure out' what the artist is trying to communicate. A viewer arrives at conclusions based on what they see.

And hopefully they took that lesson to heart.

Quote from: Lynn;924083If the viewer goes in another direction, it is the artist that fails.

But how can they 'succeed' if all art is interpreted in contexts they cannot possible realize?

Quote from: Lynn;924083Whining that 'you are not educated enough to get what I am communicating' is an amateurish, narcissistic child squeal.

Especially when it comes to art.

Quote from: Anon Adderlan;924519But how can they 'succeed' if all art is interpreted in contexts they cannot possible realize?

They can't, and they shouldn't be trying to do the impossible, IMO. Fuck the "if the reader or viewer goes in another direction, they fail" noise!
Federico Fellini of all people has an episode in his autobiography how a viewer had interpreted one of his movies in a way that almost scared him. And no, the movie was anything but a failure.
One of the greatest Bulgarian poets has a poem that he inarguably wrote in a spirit of forgiveness, based on accounts of people that knew him and talked with him, his own letters and so on. It's one of his greatest works, by all accounts.
It's also something that can and is misinterpreted routinely, including by myself when I first read it:).

How people interpret what you write or paint depends on what's already in their heads. Since you can't control what goes in their heads, you can't control what the readers or viewers would think, either;).

Quote from: Harg of the City Afar;923376I like the character sheet.

It's a good character sheet.

Though, this is my recent OSR favorite:
http://swordsandstitchery.blogspot.com/2016/04/commentary-on-srulyan-vault-by-venger.html

Quote from: Exploderwizard;923422If 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.

THIS is exactly my point. It would have been far bolder if FGG had announced the S&W: Contessa Edition and let Stacey lead a team of all female writers and artists. It would have been the same amount of identity politics, pandering and gimmick, but it would be an actual "OSR game by women for women"

THAT would have been daring. This is weaksauce.

Quote from: Lynn;923546It is a hard thing to market a product in a mature market space, especially when your product has no substantially differentiating features.

Agreed. That's why I am surprised FGG didn't go bolder.

Quote from: daniel_ream;923624There are actually a surprisingly large number of men writing romance novels, but they have to do it under female pseudonyms because women won't buy a romance novel written by a man.  This tends to limit their careers because they can't go to conventions or do publicity events like book signings.

I was a literary agent's assistant back in college and I can confirm this 100%. We had multiple romance authors who were men who also sold erotica. Several of the men had multiple female names and used the pseudonyms to become stable writers in different paperback companies.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;923656I know if someone got pissed because I had some creepy butterflies on one of my covers, my instinctual response would be to put ten creepy butterflies on the next one.

The creepy butterflies aren't the issue. It's the weird idea of attracting women customers by putting butterflies on the cover. If an all-male team put out that book while claiming the cover was now going to attract women, there would be a greatly deserved shaming over the sexist implications.

Quote from: Doc Sammy;923667because I am a shameless weeb who is willing to whore out his own game before it's even finished

Shine on you shameless weeb!

Looking forward your rough draft.

Quote from: Doc Sammy;923667And to get us back on topic, I don't see what the big deal is about FGG hiring a female developer for the new game.

There is no female developer.

It's the same made-by-penis-people text, but with female artists and a female art director.

Quote from: Ulairi;923728Let the bears pay the bear tax I'll pay the Homer tax.

...for those of you who missed the reference...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JtgvWZuyYKc

Quote from: Baulderstone;924065I think it is pretty clever the way they have played guys like Spinchcat into promoting their game as well. I'm sure some of the pledges were driven by this thread.

20 pages ago, I said I'm happy for everyone to open their wallets and make it rain on Frog God Games. I'm a big fan of Swords & Wizardry: White Box so I want to see the company prosper.

But I'm still laughing at their weaksauce gimmick and the grimdark "for the grrls" butterflies.

Quote from: Ratman_tf;924247I feel manshamed. I'm gonna go manspread in my mancave.

It's the only logical response!

Quote from: Crüesader;924265Actually, no- I want a poll:  Who has actually lived in their parents' basement, ever?

I've never been in a house with a basement in California.

I wonder if basements are still a thing with new houses anywhere in the country.

Quote from: Spinachcat;924558The creepy butterflies aren't the issue. It's the weird idea of attracting women customers by putting butterflies on the cover. If an all-male team put out that book while claiming the cover was now going to attract women, there would be a greatly deserved shaming over the sexist implications.

I wouldn't be outraged by that either. To me the outrage is the issue, not the issues behind the outrage. I see articles in my social media feeds about fighting against 'gendered toys' or covers being too sexy for example and I find that about as annoying as I find people reaction to creepy butterflies. My whole point is I just want companies and artists to make things they think are cool that will appeal to their fans without everything revolving around outrage (usually feigned) from some sector of the fan community. I think the more we give into that, the less the focus will be on quality and people putting out what inspires them. To me this cover looks inspired and like the people behind are passionate about it. If they think it will attract more women, I say they should go for it (but who knows how successful that will be). I'd much rather a company like this take a chance appealing to women in a way it thinks will work, without them worrying about the evolving landscape of offense and outrage on social media.

Quote from: Spinachcat;924558I wonder if basements are still a thing with new houses anywhere in the country.

Yeah in a lot of places I was looking, they still had basements, even in new homes, and on a lot of community boards, a lot of the country thinks CA is still very weird for not having them.

Kind of ironic that we don't, a properly constructed basement is probably the single-best thing you can do to make your house earthquake resistant (probably also the most expensive).

Quote from: Spinachcat;924558I've never been in a house with a basement in California.
I wonder if basements are still a thing with new houses anywhere in the country.

Here in Texas it is a matter of the ground not being suited for basements. You can have a basement, if you double the cost of the house.
https://dengarden.com/basements/Why-Dont-Homes-in-Texas-Have-Basements

Quote from: CRKrueger;924576Yeah in a lot of places I was looking, they still had basements, even in new homes, and on a lot of community boards, a lot of the country thinks CA is still very weird for not having them.

Kind of ironic that we don't, a properly constructed basement is probably the single-best thing you can do to make your house earthquake resistant (probably also the most expensive).

Here is Mass I think basements are the norm with new homes. Don't see too may new houses though.

I backed the kickstarter because I don't have a previous copy of S&W and thought it was a good opportunity to get one. The cover art doesn't bother me at all; I like weirdo abstract artwork and the previous covers (as shown earlier in this thread) are painfully boring to me. I do like the color scheme of the Erol Otus cover, although I don't worship his artwork like everyone else seems to. I also don't have any nostalgic feelings about D&D or the artwork thereof.

I do think that a company producing adventures and supplemental content from non-old white guy perspectives would be far more interesting than simply re-working the art work of a rule book. Settings, adventures, tool kits... that's where the writer and artist perspectives and ideas really shine through. A rule book contains the rules. Unless it's written by someone like Kevin Siembieda, it isn't going to have much flavor in it. Look at the differences in writing between the LotFP rule book and Raggi's published adventures; the rule book is dry and doesn't really show any of the "weird" that the various published adventures involve. A series of adventures or settings for written by women with art by women, would provide a different perspective that a rule book does not.

I also don't see how this will open up the game to more women, as there is virtually no promotion outside Google +, which is the most limited social networking channel. Marketing such a niche product as an RPG game, especially one that is automatically hated by the self-proclaimed gatekeepers of the hobby (RPG.net, SomethingAwful, Grognards, YDIS, etc) because it is an OGL game (which the aforementioned groups consider plagiarism) is hard enough, I suppose. Shoot, it isn't even getting a break here.

As for basements, most houses in the midwest have basements. I lived in an apartment/townhouse that had a basement. My current home, unfortunately, does not. I have never lived in a basement myself; I don't understand why anyone would really want to. I had one friend in high school who lived in his mom's basement, but he wasn't a gamer; he was a drug dealer.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;924572If they think it will attract more women, I say they should go for it (but who knows how successful that will be). I'd much rather a company like this take a chance appealing to women in a way it thinks will work, without them worrying about the evolving landscape of offense and outrage on social media.

This whole thing is the marketing equivalent of a fantasy heartbreaker.

Let's assume for a moment that FGG is actually sincere about reaching a new audience of women and not just cynically marketing to virtue-signalling SJWs.  It requires a breathtaking lack of knowledge of the rest of the industry to be unaware of the forty years of handwringing over How To Get More Women Into The Hobby, the various gimmicks that have been tried (and failed) and the industry trends that have brought large numbers of women into the hobby[1].

This is not the first time somebody has tried this kind of ham-fisted pandering.  It's never worked before and it's highly unlikely to work now, and it's reasonable to point out that either FGG is stunningly naive about their own industry or not being entirely honest about their motivations.



[1] Vampire: The Masquerade and LARPing

Quote from: daniel_ream;924627This whole thing is the marketing equivalent of a fantasy heartbreaker.

Let's assume for a moment that FGG is actually sincere about reaching a new audience of women and not just cynically marketing to virtue-signalling SJWs.  It requires a breathtaking lack of knowledge of the rest of the industry to be unaware of the forty years of handwringing over How To Get More Women Into The Hobby, the various gimmicks that have been tried (and failed) and the industry trends that have brought large numbers of women into the hobby[1].

This is not the first time somebody has tried this kind of ham-fisted pandering.  It's never worked before and it's highly unlikely to work now, and it's reasonable to point out that either FGG is stunningly naive about their own industry or not being entirely honest about their motivations.



[1] Vampire: The Masquerade and LARPing

I still find it highly amusing that the one thing that brought the female gamers out in droves are the thinly disguised rape monsters.  Carry on, humanity, carry on.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;924630I still find it highly amusing that the one thing that brought the female gamers out in droves are the thinly disguised rape monsters.  Carry on, humanity, carry on.

How many millions of books have been sold across THREE separate book series by different authors where the female protagonist's main choice is to fuck the vampire bad boy or the werewolf kinda bad boy?  This isn't even counting the full-blown supernatural erotica.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;924630I still find it highly amusing that the one thing that brought the female gamers out in droves are the thinly disguised rape monsters.

It ain't men buying those Fifty Shades of Grey novels.

("Remember, kids, hitting women is only okay if you have abs and a helicopter." ~ Stephen Molyneux)

Quote from: CRKrueger;924694How many millions of books have been sold across THREE separate book series by different authors where the female protagonist's main choice is to fuck the vampire bad boy or the werewolf kinda bad boy?  This isn't even counting the full-blown supernatural erotica.

Quote from: daniel_ream;924697It ain't men buying those Fifty Shades of Grey novels.

("Remember, kids, hitting women is only okay if you have abs and a helicopter." ~ Stephen Molyneux)

Yes, but 'Geek girls', like us Geek boys, have a tendency of claiming to not be like every other mainstream member of our preferred gender.  And yet, underneath it all, we really aren't.

And yeah, I find that funny.

What I'm taking away from this entire thread:

1- Most people don't have basements.

2- It would have been kickass to live in a basement when I was in high school.

3- If my parents ever get a basement, I'm moving into it and staying there until I can put them in a home.

Quote from: Crüesader;924760What I'm taking away from this entire thread:

1- Most people don't have basements.

2- It would have been kickass to live in a basement when I was in high school.

3- If my parents ever get a basement, I'm moving into it and staying there until I can put them in a home.

Have you watched Stranger Things? D&D, a floating Millenium Falcon and a psychic buddy, all in a basement. That's the basement I want to hang out in!

Quote from: Spinachcat;924558I've never been in a house with a basement in California.

I wonder if basements are still a thing with new houses anywhere in the country.

Here in Wisconsin Most houses have a basement new build or old, the few that don't have a crawl space, and have there sale values cut significantly as your heating costs go thru the roof. The reason is the ground is cold and draws A lot of the heat out of your house in winter, and your floors are always cold to boot.

Discussing basements is pretty much the weirdest thread derailment I've ever seen. Get back to the topic guys; or don't.

Quote from: CRKrueger;924694How many millions of books have been sold across THREE separate book series by different authors where the female protagonist's main choice is to fuck the vampire bad boy or the werewolf kinda bad boy?  This isn't even counting the full-blown supernatural erotica.

[Sagan] Billions and billions [/Sagan]

Quote from: Nexus;925375[Sagan] Billions and billions [/Sagan]

Twishite comes to mind.

I don't care who does the art, but at least do it well. My sister (http://www.brigitteodowd.com/) could do a lot better than that. Many is the time during a game my players and I have laughed at the cliches. But then, someone always needs to be the gatekeeper.

The interior art is apparently alot better than the cover. Pretty good detailing.

So...women added a little gloss to something created by men, and ask for extra special applause (and money)? You go, girls.

Quote from: The_Shadow;926279So...women added a little gloss to something created by men, and ask for extra special applause (and money)? You go, girls.

Duh! If it's a team of all female artists, then it magically appeals to EVERYONE, whereas a team of all male or a mixed-gender team cannot possibly do the same. It's really very simple.

Well one good thing about projects like these: they're great asshole detectors.

Quote from: Necrozius;926452Well one good thing about projects like these: they're great asshole detectors.

Another good thing is the hypocrisy and double-standards it exposes.

I think the selling point was more supposed to be that the artist team is all female more than their art is allegedly more universally appealing. Its somethinf they believe will appeal to women and men that are concerned about the issues like "gender balance" in gaming. More pushing the sizzle (the appearance of being more progressive than others) than the steak (than the art who's quality isn't really effected by the sex of the artists), in a sense.

Quote from: Necrozius;926452Well one good thing about projects like these: they're great asshole detectors.

I'm sorry you see it that way.

I got off the identity politics bandwagon when I realized labels like asshole/creep/racist/sexist were being used like the word "witch" in the 16th century, to end discussions, stigmatize enemies and retaliate for ideological slights. Of course, unlike witches, assholes actually exist, but I don't think it does anyone any good to toss all dissenting opinions into that category. All that does is feed the growing backlash and make it easier for real assholes to slip away in the confusion.

Quote from: Wraith;926453Another good thing is the hypocrisy and double-standards it exposes.

There's probably always going to be some degree of double standards regarding the sexes barring fairly massive sociological or psychological change. It almost seems hardwired into the human psyche. It one thing that makes creating an ostensible equal society such a thorny goal.

Quote from: Nexus;926454I think the selling point was more supposed to be that the artist team is all female more than their art is allegedly more universally appealing. Its somethinf they believe will appeal to women and men that are concerned about the issues like "gender balance" in gaming. More pushing the sizzle (the appearance of being more progressive than others) than the steak (than the art who's quality isn't really effected by the sex of the artists), in a sense.

Question...

So how is anyone supposed to know this? Is it emblazoned on the cover? Ir is it just KS hype? Because really, hows anyone to know once its on the shelves?

Quote from: Omega;926496Question...

So how is anyone supposed to know this? Is it emblazoned on the cover? Ir is it just KS hype? Because really, hows anyone to know once its on the shelves?

Good question. Maybe they were counting on word of mouth and the controversy? It appears to have generated some conversation. The publicity could help sales and it doesn't directly cost the company anything.

It's hard to make a controversy out of a nontroversy. Were there women stigmatized by the gender balance issues? Where were these issues defined? I have run S&W for a group of males and females and have NEVER heard a complaint from females, probably because as a role-playing game, the roles are defined by the players. This just comes across as contrived and made-up need to politicize something that isn't an issue. Plus the cover art does nothing to promote the game as fantasy role-playing, explain the theme or even be a welcome wagon for women. To be totally honest and not sarcastic or insincere at all, wouldn't a better option would be to make a female oriented version of S&W? Not just the art, but rewrite the game from a feminine angle, define strong feminine roles in words. Make an entirely new game on the S&W rules engine, not with cheesy stereotypes but using strong women in fantasy fiction as examples. (like Galadriel, Jirel of Joiry, etc).

Quote from: bat;926618To be totally honest and not sarcastic or insincere at all, wouldn't a better option would be to make a female oriented version of S&W? Not just the art, but rewrite the game from a feminine angle, define strong feminine roles in words. Make an entirely new game on the S&W rules engine, not with cheesy stereotypes but using strong women in fantasy fiction as examples. (like Galadriel, Jirel of Joiry, etc).

Yeah, but what about Galadriel's Gender makes her the way she is?  She's clearly one of the most powerful beings in Middle-Earth after the Valar, so I suppose you could argue there's a Feanor/Galadriel Male/Female divide there, but I doubt considering how the other elves acted that Feanor was meant to embody "maleness" any more than Galadriel embodied "femaleness".  Yeah men said she was a witch with terrible sorcerous powers, they said the same thing about the Elven-King of Mirkwood.

Jirel of Joiry might be a better example, but again, aside from standing out due to her sex in a traditionally male-held role, I don't know where the "feminine" part makes an appearance translating to a game.  Jirel stands out because she is (for the pulp fiction of that time) an exceptionally well-drawn, complex, and realistic character.  How does that translate to rules?

Now, sure, you can go with your gut, and a lot of people's anecdotes point to women on average being more about investigation, social connections, and solving things through other means than violence than men are, but again, other than having a skill system and a well-drawn, complex, and realistic campaign, how do you accomplish this?

It's one of those things that really shouldn't be expressed mechanically.  First, because a lot of women like chopping shit up every bit as much as men do, and secondly, because that kind of more social, less violent and more investigative game that might appeal to this theoretical "average female gamer" better is one is created by the GM and players at the table by interacting with a well done setting, whether the rules are OD&D, Traveller, RQ, or Xworld.

Quote from: CRKrueger;926625It's one of those things that really shouldn't be expressed mechanically.  First, because a lot of women like chopping shit up every bit as much as men do, and secondly, because that kind of more social, less violent and more investigative game that might appeal to this theoretical "average female gamer" better is one is created by the GM and players at the table by interacting with a well done setting, whether the rules are OD&D, Traveller, RQ, or Xworld.

The woman player in my last Dark Sun campaign was all about hacking her enemies to bits and eating them. (She really got into the cutthroat survival aspect of Dark Sun.)
My approach has always been to put a little bit of everything into a game, and see what the players seem to like best. I do think that there are activites that tend to be favored by one gender over another, but I never limit myself to thinking "The chicks won't dig a traditional dungeon crawl" or "Guys don't like social stuff", or the opposite "I must make every female NPC a strong, independent womyn because muh gender politics".

Quote from: Ratman_tf;926626The woman player in my last Dark Sun campaign was all about hacking her enemies to bits and eating them. (She really got into the cutthroat survival aspect of Dark Sun.)
My approach has always been to put a little bit of everything into a game, and see what the players seem to like best. I do think that there are activites that tend to be favored by one gender over another, but I never limit myself to thinking "The chicks won't dig a traditional dungeon crawl" or "Guys don't like social stuff", or the opposite "I must make every female NPC a strong, independent womyn because muh gender politics".

Yeah it's not something you design for. It's the old Cult of the Designer problem.  Designers are trying to achieve things in gameplay and even worse, outside of gameplay that don't have anything to do with the rules.  Being designers, they think they can design for that.  They're seeing it as a technical problem.  They can no more fix gender issues in gaming through game design then Microsoft can fix gender issues in IT by programming a new version of Word.

I agree that it doesn't need to be expressed mechanically, in my experience it doesn't need to be expressed by an all female art team either, but others feel differently. A game with strong female leads should be something that any group can create themselves. Other people might be encouraged with some more elements, like the art and even mechanics. I don't think that the all female art team is wrong, I believe the premise is dumb and that the cover is awful, but others felt the need for it. I just think it wasn't well directed.

Quote from: CRKrueger;926625Yeah, but what about Galadriel's Gender makes her the way she is?  She's clearly one of the most powerful beings in Middle-Earth after the Valar, so I suppose you could argue there's a Feanor/Galadriel Male/Female divide there, but I doubt considering how the other elves acted that Feanor was meant to embody "maleness" any more than Galadriel embodied "femaleness".

I've got trouble imagining elves embodying "maleness", so youre probably right on Feanor:p.

QuoteYeah men said she was a witch with terrible sorcerous powers, they said the same thing about the Elven-King of Mirkwood.

And possibly were right for both of them.

QuoteJirel of Joiry might be a better example, but again, aside from standing out due to her sex in a traditionally male-held role, I don't know where the "feminine" part makes an appearance translating to a game.  Jirel stands out because she is (for the pulp fiction of that time) an exceptionally well-drawn, complex, and realistic character.  How does that translate to rules?

Why rules? Most of my female players wouldn't want different rules based on gender.
Just write a variant of the game where the examples are mostly female characters. That should do it with the "making the game female-friendly" for most people.

QuoteNow, sure, you can go with your gut, and a lot of people's anecdotes point to women on average being more about investigation, social connections, and solving things through other means than violence than men are, but again, other than having a skill system and a well-drawn, complex, and realistic campaign, how do you accomplish this?

Again, it's an OSR game. I doubt most people even want a heavy skill system.
Just give more examples on how to use the reaction roll, and more advice to the Referee for plotting a campaign.

QuoteIt's one of those things that really shouldn't be expressed mechanically.  First, because a lot of women like chopping shit up every bit as much as men do, and secondly, because that kind of more social, less violent and more investigative game that might appeal to this theoretical "average female gamer" better is one is created by the GM and players at the table by interacting with a well done setting, whether the rules are OD&D, Traveller, RQ, or Xworld.

That I agree on, and I'm not sure whether "the average female gamer" enjoys well-done setting more than the "average male gamer". IME, it's just that the average male gamer is more willing to live without a well-done setting.
Anyway, just adding advice on setting should do the trick, wouldn't it;)?