QuoteYou know, it occurs to me now that the Darling Effect (and why shouldn't we capitalise it at this point?) bears a distinct likeness to the "vaporwear" phenomenon in the computer/console game industry. Someone with a great idea, and the capacity to generate intense excitement over it, but lacking the means to make it a reality.

Well, except that in the computer game world, the pre-release hype usually turns into cynicism after X period of not being released.

Whereas Cthulhutech continues to be a pre-release darling everytime it comes up, even as, at last report, it's being delayed again for the umpteenth time.

It's like the Duke Nukem Forever of roleplaying games, but without the universal disdain that DNF has engendered from the gaming community after being milked way past it's hype allowance.

The Darling Effect is something important-

It´s the main reason people are put off by RPG.Net: Many RPGers I know have visited the forae and 99% have turned their back on it.
"It´s a different planet!" they say.

There´s hype and references to stuff nobody in the real world even has heard of, including dedicated Gamers.

A different planet, with exotic (insidious) atmosphere made out of 45% Darling, 22% Forge, 32% Exalted and all other games as trace elements.

Quote from: SettembriniThe Darling Effect is something important-

A different planet, with exotic (insidious) atmosphere made out of 45% Darling, 22% Forge, 32% Exalted and all other games as trace elements.

The concept of playtesting may then be another factor as previously pointed out by a few posters. Would-be fans participate in playtests at cons or wherever with fantastic GMs, and as a result of the GMing, they form an opinion that the game is fantastic. Now, whether the game actually is fantastic or not is irrelevant, because the prowess of the GM basically sold them on the game. This would seem to fit based on what we've heard about Dread.

Quote from: SettembriniA different planet, with exotic (insidious) atmosphere made out of 45% Darling, 22% Forge, 32% Exalted and all other games as trace elements.

. . . and bound to defeat any TL combat environment suit in 30 minutes.  

Quote from: SettembriniA different planet, with exotic (insidious) atmosphere made out of 45% Darling, 22% Forge, 32% Exalted and all other games as trace elements.

You earned a huge quanity of geek-cred for that reference. :eek:

!i!

Quote from: Tom BTo be fair, I thought the resolution mechanic was fairly nifty and gave an effect that was hard to duplicate with other systems.

Hmm. . . must have made more of an impression on you than it did on me. I don't recall it being anything other than a standard pool mechanic with 12-sided dice. Of course, I played the game all of twice before I traded it off (or sold it, I forget) to Peter Amthor.

QuoteIt's also one of those games that seems to do better in play than it may sound from reading it.

See, that was my problem (other than the secret history thing, which looked as bad on paper as it actually played out) -- in actual play Dread didn't do a single thing that Fudge, Fate, GURPS, etc couldn't do out of the box. There were no mechanical hooks for the setting or premise, no real impetus to use the Dread system instead of Your Favorite Generic System. And, no, this simply isn't true of most games, as you claim. Most games have some native mechanical support for their premise or setting.

QuoteI definitely recommend it for an effective horror game.

I believe that I'm with Andy here, ironically. I'd recommend it as a reference but not as a game, as I feel that the truly good bits come solely in the form of fluff. There was simply no compelling reason for me to use the default mechanics, as they didn't do anything that dozens of other systems didn't/don't (past using 12-sided dice exclusively). I think part of why I like the playtest rules better than the finished product is because I'm still not convinced that Dread justifies its own existence as a game.

Quote from: jeff37923Please tell me that you're kidding about this. You aren't really followed by fanboys trying to convert you to a game you just don't like, are you? I mean, that's just too, uh, evangelical for my taste.

Sadly, no, I'm not joking. That said, I can only think of two who actually follow me around -- several others just happen to post at the same places I do and take every opportunity to proselytize me. Usually this backfires horribly and, as of late, has manifested as a resolve to die screaming before I play a particular game ever again.

Quote from: jdrakehHmm. . . must have made more of an impression on you than it did on me. I don't recall it being anything other than a standard pool mechanic with 12-sided dice. Of course, I played the game all of twice before I traded it off (or sold it, I forget) to Peter Amthor.

You rolled a pool of d12s for attack and defense.  If the attacker gets the high roll, you subtract the defender's highest roll from the attacker's, and that's the damage done.  There are some minor modifiers for weaponry and armor, but that's the basic idea.  Quick and potentially quite lethal.

QuoteSee, that was my problem (other than the secret history thing, which looked as bad on paper as it actually played out) -- in actual play Dread didn't do a single thing that Fudge, Fate, GURPS, etc couldn't do out of the box. There were no mechanical hooks for the setting or premise, no real impetus to use the Dread system instead of Your Favorite Generic System. And, no, this simply isn't true of most games, as you claim. Most games have some native mechanical support for their premise or setting.

Well...generally those systems aren't as potentially deadly.  Also, the mechanics support the concept of core roles in the group.  The fighter, the researcher, the magic user...these are important roles in the game, and the mechanics certainly provide benefits for each of them, moreso that the alternatives you mention above.  It would also be very difficult to duplicate Dread's spells in the systems you mention, and they also provide support for the atmosphere of the game.  So, as with any game, you can replace the mechanics with the generic system of your choice.  I feel the Dread mechanics do actually support the premise of the setting.  That's not to say that better mechanics don't exist.  Personally, I might be inclined to try EABA or CORPS.  The latter in particular is also potentially a quite deadly system.  But the Dread mechanics are very simple and do support the game's premise, so it wouldn't be an easy decision...they worked well for us, in any case.

QuoteI think part of why I like the playtest rules better than the finished product is because I'm still not convinced that Dread justifies its own existence as a game.

That's fine.  There are a number of games out there that I'm not sure justify their existence as a game (for me, anyway).  If I were to play them, I'd replace the mechanics with others I like better.  As long as people play and enjoy them, though, that's fine with me.  I'm not going to tell them they're wrong.

I also have the Dread playtest rules, but haven't read through them, yet.  I've heard they have advantages over the rules as published, though.

To tie this into the original post, though, "darlings" aren't always games being unjustly pushed by people who aren't sincere.  Sometimes, they're being pushed by people who actually enjoy them.  Now, it could be due to "new buyer" syndrome...the most enthusiastic supporters are often those who just bought the game.  For whatever faults Dread may have, I prefer it to a large number of games that received even more effusive 'pushing' by posters on various forums.

Quote from: Tom BWell...generally those systems aren't as potentially deadly.

All of those systems allow you to scale lethality to taste (and GURPS actually has that level of lethality built into its core combat system). I think that you need to prove that these system won't handle "lethal" as, having played them all, that claim rings very hollow to me.

QuoteAlso, the mechanics support the concept of core roles in the group.  The fighter, the researcher, the magic user...these are important roles in the game, and the mechanics certainly provide benefits for each of them, moreso that the alternatives you mention above.

Please tell me how Dread provides mechanical support for, say a fighter, that couldn't be duplicated with ease in FUDGE, Fate, or GURPS (or, for that matter, in CORPS, EABA, BRP, d20, etc).
 

QuoteIt would also be very difficult to duplicate Dread's spells in the systems you mention, and they also provide support for the atmosphere of the game.

Examples? I don't see anything special about the mechanics of the spells. The fluff can be easily transplanted into any of the aforementioned systems.

QuoteI feel the Dread mechanics do actually support the premise of the setting.

How so? By providing some generic archetypes taht appear in dozens of other horror game? Or by making combat lethal? Again, I think I need examples here, because those two simply don't cut it in that (again) dozens of other games do that, too. I'm just not seeing the concept-specific mechanical support that you speak of.

Quote from: jdrakehAll of those systems allow you to scale lethality to taste (and GURPS actually has that level of lethality built into its core combat system). I think that you need to prove that these system won't handle "lethal" as, having played them all, that claim rings very hollow to me.

Yes, yes, yes.  Any game can be modified to get the result you want.  I don't like modifying games to get what I want unless I have a strong reason for doing so.  I prefer to run them as written as much as possible.  Personal preference.  It's the same with the rest of your comments.  Yes, I'm sure you can modify games to provide bonuses and benefits so that you can recreate the Dread archtypes.  I prefer not to have to do that.  

QuoteExamples? I don't see anything special about the mechanics of the spells. The fluff can be easily transplanted into any of the aforementioned systems.

With some effort, yes, you could re-create the mechanical effects of the spells.  See my reply above.  By your argument, there's no reason to buy any genre specific system, because they can be duplicated using generic systems.  And sometimes I like using generic systems for this result.  I used the CORPS mechanics instead of those with Dark Conspiracy.  We're about to experiment with using SotC mechanics for Darkurthe Legends.  I usually only do this with games where I have a problem with the mechanics.  Since I have no real problem with the Dread mechanics, I don't see why I would gain anything by doing so.  If you don't like them, you're certainly free to use GURPS or whatever other system you like.

I think this is drifting from the thread's topic, though.  I have no reason to justify why I like the Dread mechanics...but I'd be glad to continue discussing it.  Might be good to either PM me or start a new thread, though.

Quote from: Kyle AaronWhat a strange reaction to drooling fanboys. Who cares whether anyone likes or dislikes some game? Have a look at itself yourself, play it if you think it worth it, and fanboys and haters be damned together.

The problem I found with Wushu is that the discrepency between what the fanboys claim the game can do, and what it actually delivers, is so vast that it's impossible to make an objective evaluation of the game on it's own.
 
I found the same almost held true for Exalted. Except as far as I'm concerned, Exalted blows so hard that God almighty himself could declare it the one true game, and I still wouldn't play it.
 
Were I not an atheist, of course.

But...

• Why would you ask people on a gaming message board about a game most of them have never played?
• If you didn't ask them a question, why would you listen to its answer?

People will always blather on about stuff they know nothing about. It's human nature. It's just more obvious online because it's there in text, for as long as the servers hold out, maybe years.

You just scan over it and move on to the person who obviously does know what they're talking about. Would you ask Ron Edwards about D&D? Would you ask RPGPundit about Dogs in the Vineyard? No, because they wouldn't know what they're talking about. And if they expressed an opinion, would you listen to it for any reason other than laughs?

Granted, the endless drooling fanboyism or hate-ons get dull. But I don't understand why your opinion of X would be affected by that. I mean, I have no interest in Spirit of the Century, but that's not because 50,000 drooling fanboys on rpg.net who never even played or ran it and never will were having critical fumbles in their pants over it - it's because I was happy enough with Fate 2.0, and I have no lasting interest in stunts or feats or stuff like that.

Likewise, Exalted bored me not because of the fanboys or haters, but because of k3w1 pw0rz. I can express my munchin tendencies well enough already without having a whole system for it.

And then they have a hard-on or hate-on for d20, well so what? It bores me either way.

And then RPGPundit calls CIVIS ROMANVS SVM "the HBO game." Oh no! My game will be lavishly detailed, have sympathetic characters, not historical but interesting, and well-loved by millions! Shit let's cancel tonight's session!

I just don't get it. I mean, if you were dating some super hot movie star chick and millions of guys were posting to fanpages and drooling over pics of her, would you have less desire for her because others had desire for her and were making fools of themselves about it, too? "There's a discrepancy between how hot you say she is, and how she looks in the morning after a heavy night of drinking and shagging... so I can't feel desire for her."

Who cares what others think of what we like? What are we, communists?

Quote from: Kyle AaronWho cares what others think of what we like? What are we, communists?

Heh.

Quote from: Kyle AaronI mean, if you were dating some super hot movie star chick and millions of guys were posting to fanpages and drooling over pics of her, would you have less desire for her because others had desire for her and were making fools of themselves about it, too?

Yes.  They would sully it for her and me both.  Mostly me.  And I can't have that.

!i!

Quote from: jdrakehI think he means that a game specifically designed to appeal to an online audience (or built upon the expectations and desires of such an audience) is doomed to longterm commercial failure because the portion of gamers that haunt internet forums is very, very, tiny compared to those who. . er. . don't.

Yes, pretty much. The stuff that makes it likely to become a darling makes it useless to most gamers.

Have you ever met the type of dude who defines himself by the weird bands he listens to? RPG.net is at times like an entire web site of those dudes, and the weird bands they listen to are gaming's darlings.

(Aside: There are times when I look at celebrity playlists on iTunes, or hear people talk about the bands they like, and figure that saying something like "I love AC/DC, Aerosmith, and the Eagles" would make you the most non-mainstream person on the planet.)