Quote from: migo on March 23, 2023, 08:18:35 PM

The point he's doing is if she's using the D&D SRD as a base, she's strengthening the D&D ecosystem, thus strengthening D&D. I'm not sure how true that is, when 4e was out and Pathfinder was king it doesn't seem to have been the case, but the other perspective is it kept players 'close to home' and ready to move back to D&D when the next edition came out. So it's possible that Shadowdark catches interest for a year or two until D&D 6e is released, and players start moving back. It's still familiar, and the novelty provided by Shadowdark has worn off.

We'll see what happens ultimately, but there is a point that if you want to take a real chunk out of D&D, you need to move clearly out of the D&D base.

That's true.  However, my slant was that before anyone can take a chunk out of the D&D base, you need D&D to fracture across multiple titles.  It's not really possible to take a meaningful chunk out of an 800 lb gorilla.  However, if it's a 600 lb gorilla, its pair of 50 lb junior members, and then a few more 5 to 10 lb related apes--it gets easier.  Not simple, not easy, but easier. 

It's very difficult to get most people to try their second game.  Even switching editions can be hard with some.  However, once you get someone to try something slightly different--anything different, it's much easier to to get them to try a third or fourth thing.  Usually.  Some people, of course, hate the second thing they try, and good luck getting them to try again.

Quote from: FingerRod on March 23, 2023, 08:14:40 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 23, 2023, 12:21:48 PM

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on March 23, 2023, 07:44:18 AM

Quote from: SHARK on March 23, 2023, 02:27:42 AM

I love the girl's *Hustle*! I also like boldness, and, yeah. I'm also thrilled that she took notice of WOTC's BS, and swiftly set herself up...to stomp on them, with style. Not to be overtly vulgar--and I'm definitely not simping for her--but her timing, her presentation, of *Boom*--it' a very nice "Fuck You!" to WOTC. So, I am a fan. I hope she does very well, and becomes *Hugely* successful and *rich*. I think it is great for everyone to get up like tigers and bite back at WOTC's BS.

Anything that takes a bite out of WotC and their host of smug assholes is a net plus.  Don't even care if the thing taking the bite is good or not, woke or not, or almost any other criteria you could name. And I don't just mean market share, even long term, either.  Anything that takes attention away from their D&D The Animal Farm Brought to Life edition is great.

IF she's using the OGL or the 5.1 CC By SRD she's doing the exact opposite of that.

She isn't. She released a video well before the KS dropped talking about the fortunate timing of an OGL-less approach.

Then why does the latest quickstart (downloaded again yesterday) state:

Legal Information and Attribution Statement
Not for resale or redistribution. Permission granted to print
or copy for personal use only. Shadowdark RPG © The Arcane
Library, LLC. This work includes material taken from the System
Reference Document 5.1 ("SRD 5.1") by Wizards of the Coast LLC
and available at https://dnd.wizards.com/resources/systemsreference-
document. The SRD 5.1 is licensed under the Creative
Commons Attribution 4.0 International License available at
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode.

Quote from: FingerRod on March 23, 2023, 08:53:05 PM

I'm not sure what is hilarious about a good marketing campaign.

The game doesn't offer anything that would benefit my players. So I'm not a backer. But effectively advertising and good business skills should be commended, not vilified.

These are indisputable facts:

1. This thread has focused more on the creator's sexuality than the creator has.

2. Any issue with reviewers should stay with the reviewers. If I can convince Scarlet Johansson to shave the name of my game into her pubes, good on me. If Professor DM doesn't divulge his relationship with the creator that is on him, not her.

3. Any challenge to this gets labeled as white knighting, which automatically means the person who is making that claim has lost. Again, I'm not a backer. I will not give her my money. But masks ARE falling throughout this thread.

4. Migo is a clown. I have never once told people how to spend their money. I am a member of the dreaded 1%.. I gave $1000 to Jim buying products I will never use just because he was being canceled. I've done the same with others. I would never tell somebody how to spend their money. But he will shift his anti-crusade against this game to anything he can.

5. DM Grognard is an actual bigot. Bringing her wife into this and the lame tentacle joke is retarded. And has nothing to do with the game. The bed-wetting woke will justify their delusions because of backward ass shits like him.

6. SHARK has a clear view into this. His posts have been outstanding.

Greetings!

Thank you, FingerRod! I am glad some people appreciate my observations! *Laughing*

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: Eirikrautha on March 23, 2023, 09:58:48 PM

Then why does the latest quickstart (downloaded again yesterday) state:

Legal Information and Attribution Statement
Not for resale or redistribution. Permission granted to print
or copy for personal use only. Shadowdark RPG © The Arcane
Library, LLC. This work includes material taken from the System
Reference Document 5.1 ("SRD 5.1") by Wizards of the Coast LLC
and available at https://dnd.wizards.com/resources/systemsreference-
document. The SRD 5.1 is licensed under the Creative
Commons Attribution 4.0 International License available at
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode.

I believe the sequence of events was roughly:
1. She wrote it using OGL, and had already announced the KS launch date.
2. Then WotC made noises about revoking OGL and she consulted with lawyers and started scrubbing the doc of any WotC IP that might be a problem. For example there was a version where stirges became "stingbats"
3. Then WotC caved and put the 5.1 SRD into CC.
4. To avoid the KS launch date slipping she included the CC attribution and carried on with the ready-for-the-printers manuscript.

I might have misstated or omitted some details, but that's the gist.

She's never made any bones about this being an offshoot of D&D. She has published a bunch of 5e adventures and has expressed a fondness for the system. If the purity test is being adequately anti-5e or anti-WotC to please everyone here, she'll fail that for sure.

I think that's a flat out stupid purity test. Fact is that if every single one of her ~10k backers *and* all their friends never bought a WotC product ever again, WotC likely wouldn't even notice.

Whatever

Quote from: Festus on March 23, 2023, 10:38:54 PM

Quote from: Eirikrautha on March 23, 2023, 09:58:48 PM

Then why does the latest quickstart (downloaded again yesterday) state:

Legal Information and Attribution Statement
Not for resale or redistribution. Permission granted to print
or copy for personal use only. Shadowdark RPG © The Arcane
Library, LLC. This work includes material taken from the System
Reference Document 5.1 ("SRD 5.1") by Wizards of the Coast LLC
and available at https://dnd.wizards.com/resources/systemsreference-
document. The SRD 5.1 is licensed under the Creative
Commons Attribution 4.0 International License available at
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode.

I believe the sequence of events was roughly:
1. She wrote it using OGL, and had already announced the KS launch date.
2. Then WotC made noises about revoking OGL and she consulted with lawyers and started scrubbing the doc of any WotC IP that might be a problem. For example there was a version where stirges became "stingbats"
3. Then WotC caved and put the 5.1 SRD into CC.
4. To avoid the KS launch date slipping she included the CC attribution and carried on with the ready-for-the-printers manuscript.

I might have misstated or omitted some details, but that's the gist.

She's never made any bones about this being an offshoot of D&D. She has published a bunch of 5e adventures and has expressed a fondness for the system. If the purity test is being adequately anti-5e or anti-WotC to please everyone here, she'll fail that for sure.

I think that's a flat out stupid purity test. Fact is that if every single one of her ~10k backers *and* all their friends never bought a WotC product ever again, WotC likely wouldn't even notice.

Whatever

Care to point to where ANYONE says it has to be anti-5e or anti-WotC or anti-ANYTHING?

Pointing out that using either the OGL or the CC By contributes to D&D's network effect isn't putting ANY requirement on her or her game, it's just pointing a fact that negates the game having a negative effect on D&D, something that has been stated (by people here, who I'm answering to) the game will do.

After that you can resume calling everyone a bigot.

Greetings!

The idea isn't complex, people. Generally, the more people playing Shadowdark, the less people wallowing in WOTC and 6E sewage. In my book, that's a *win* and it makes me happy.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 23, 2023, 11:12:23 PM

Quote from: Festus on March 23, 2023, 10:38:54 PM

Quote from: Eirikrautha on March 23, 2023, 09:58:48 PM

Then why does the latest quickstart (downloaded again yesterday) state:

Legal Information and Attribution Statement
Not for resale or redistribution. Permission granted to print
or copy for personal use only. Shadowdark RPG © The Arcane
Library, LLC. This work includes material taken from the System
Reference Document 5.1 ("SRD 5.1") by Wizards of the Coast LLC
and available at https://dnd.wizards.com/resources/systemsreference-
document. The SRD 5.1 is licensed under the Creative
Commons Attribution 4.0 International License available at
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode.

I believe the sequence of events was roughly:
1. She wrote it using OGL, and had already announced the KS launch date.
2. Then WotC made noises about revoking OGL and she consulted with lawyers and started scrubbing the doc of any WotC IP that might be a problem. For example there was a version where stirges became "stingbats"
3. Then WotC caved and put the 5.1 SRD into CC.
4. To avoid the KS launch date slipping she included the CC attribution and carried on with the ready-for-the-printers manuscript.

I might have misstated or omitted some details, but that's the gist.

She's never made any bones about this being an offshoot of D&D. She has published a bunch of 5e adventures and has expressed a fondness for the system. If the purity test is being adequately anti-5e or anti-WotC to please everyone here, she'll fail that for sure.

I think that's a flat out stupid purity test. Fact is that if every single one of her ~10k backers *and* all their friends never bought a WotC product ever again, WotC likely wouldn't even notice.

Whatever

Care to point to where ANYONE says it has to be anti-5e or anti-WotC or anti-ANYTHING?

Pointing out that using either the OGL or the CC By contributes to D&D's network effect isn't putting ANY requirement on her or her game, it's just pointing a fact that negates the game having a negative effect on D&D, something that has been stated (by people here, who I'm answering to) the game will do.

After that you can resume calling everyone a bigot.

*Laughing* Wow.

First, I wouldn't use "bigot" in relation to a bias for or against a game system or company. I reserve that word for more serious and impactful biases.
Second, this forum and thread are chock full of all sorts of anti-this and anti-that, especially anti-WotC, which I'm actually cool with. WotC sucks.
Third, SHARK praised the author saying "she took notice of WOTC's BS, and swiftly set herself up...to stomp on them, with style" and called it a 'very nice "Fuck You!" to WOTC"
Fourth, Steven Mitchell said "Anything that takes a bite out of WotC and their host of smug assholes is a net plus. "
THEN you chimed in that if the game used the OGL or CC it did anything but that.

So yeah, the context of the thread was *absolutely* about the author specifically being anti-WotC, taking notice, stomping on them, "fuck you", WotC's BS, WotC being smug assholes, and so on. But hey, sorry to have ruffled your feathers! Bless your heart.

*More laughing*

Quote from: FingerRod on March 23, 2023, 08:53:05 PM



4. Migo is a clown. I have never once told people how to spend their money. I am a member of the dreaded 1%.. I gave $1000 to Jim buying products I will never use just because he was being canceled. I've done the same with others. I would never tell somebody how to spend their money. But he will shift his anti-crusade against this game to anything he can.

For someone who professes not to claim about whether someone buys the game or not, you sure do care a great deal about people's reasons for not buying the game.

Quote from: SHARK on March 23, 2023, 11:46:28 PM
Greetings!

The idea isn't complex, people. Generally, the more people playing Shadowdark, the less people wallowing in WOTC and 6E sewage. In my book, that's a *win* and it makes me happy.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Exactly this! Shadowdark can only benefit the hobby as a whole and, perhaps, send some like-minded players over to the weird games that I like. And that's the worst case scenario. Best case is that the game succeeds and now we have more opportunities to play something other than D&D (TM).

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's probably a duck. If it turns out to be some secret new world order woke plot funded by George Soros, well shucks you fooled me. No shame in that.

Quote from: Festus on March 24, 2023, 12:05:07 AM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 23, 2023, 11:12:23 PM

Quote from: Festus on March 23, 2023, 10:38:54 PM

Quote from: Eirikrautha on March 23, 2023, 09:58:48 PM

Then why does the latest quickstart (downloaded again yesterday) state:

Legal Information and Attribution Statement
Not for resale or redistribution. Permission granted to print
or copy for personal use only. Shadowdark RPG © The Arcane
Library, LLC. This work includes material taken from the System
Reference Document 5.1 ("SRD 5.1") by Wizards of the Coast LLC
and available at https://dnd.wizards.com/resources/systemsreference-
document. The SRD 5.1 is licensed under the Creative
Commons Attribution 4.0 International License available at
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode.

I believe the sequence of events was roughly:
1. She wrote it using OGL, and had already announced the KS launch date.
2. Then WotC made noises about revoking OGL and she consulted with lawyers and started scrubbing the doc of any WotC IP that might be a problem. For example there was a version where stirges became "stingbats"
3. Then WotC caved and put the 5.1 SRD into CC.
4. To avoid the KS launch date slipping she included the CC attribution and carried on with the ready-for-the-printers manuscript.

I might have misstated or omitted some details, but that's the gist.

She's never made any bones about this being an offshoot of D&D. She has published a bunch of 5e adventures and has expressed a fondness for the system. If the purity test is being adequately anti-5e or anti-WotC to please everyone here, she'll fail that for sure.

I think that's a flat out stupid purity test. Fact is that if every single one of her ~10k backers *and* all their friends never bought a WotC product ever again, WotC likely wouldn't even notice.

Whatever

Care to point to where ANYONE says it has to be anti-5e or anti-WotC or anti-ANYTHING?

Pointing out that using either the OGL or the CC By contributes to D&D's network effect isn't putting ANY requirement on her or her game, it's just pointing a fact that negates the game having a negative effect on D&D, something that has been stated (by people here, who I'm answering to) the game will do.

After that you can resume calling everyone a bigot.

*Laughing* Wow.

First, I wouldn't use "bigot" in relation to a bias for or against a game system or company. I reserve that word for more serious and impactful biases.
Second, this forum and thread are chock full of all sorts of anti-this and anti-that, especially anti-WotC, which I'm actually cool with. WotC sucks.
Third, SHARK praised the author saying "she took notice of WOTC's BS, and swiftly set herself up...to stomp on them, with style" and called it a 'very nice "Fuck You!" to WOTC"
Fourth, Steven Mitchell said "Anything that takes a bite out of WotC and their host of smug assholes is a net plus. "
THEN you chimed in that if the game used the OGL or CC it did anything but that.

So yeah, the context of the thread was *absolutely* about the author specifically being anti-WotC, taking notice, stomping on them, "fuck you", WotC's BS, WotC being smug assholes, and so on. But hey, sorry to have ruffled your feathers! Bless your heart.

*More laughing*

NOWHERE in your wall of text have you provided proof that ANYONE established a "purity test" (your own words) that the game or the developer have to be anti-ANYTHING.

Now, you can either provide it or admit you were wrong.

As for calling people a bigot, my bad, I mixed you with fingerrod.

Quote from: SHARK on March 23, 2023, 11:46:28 PM
Greetings!

The idea isn't complex, people. Generally, the more people playing Shadowdark, the less people wallowing in WOTC and 6E sewage. In my book, that's a *win* and it makes me happy.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

I agree that the less people slurping WotC's grey goo the better. I disagree that a game (any game, this includes all the OSR ones that use it) that uses the OGL or the CC By isn't helping WotC's network effect, the name of their game is right there.

But that's a different discussion, this thread was about the reviewers and the apparently sudden explosion of support for a game that many didn't see coming before the flood of marketing. In that regard I do smell something fishy on some cases.

Is that the developer's fault? I think not, she's playing the game and winning with the rules others wrote, so more power to her. I for one am grateful because she has shown a way to do things I hadn't thought off.

Is her game "innovative" only in the sense that she took a lot of mechanics from other games and combined them, you might not like some or all the mechanics she choose, but she was the first to combine them.

The distance thing = The Black Hack
Random rolling the improvement = The Black Hack
Torches equal to IRL time = The BrOSR, Gygax
Advantage = 5e
Magic mechanics = DCC

The fact that the reviewers don't mention this speaks lots about them, either they're shills or they don't know what they're talking about, in the case of some of them I think they KNOW what they are talking about ergo they're shilling the game. But that's like my opinion man.

Quote from: FingerRod on March 23, 2023, 08:53:05 PM

I'm not sure what is hilarious about a good marketing campaign.
...

In my defense, I can only say that when I sit down and contemplate the best way to maximize the visibility of a new RPG release; Only one venue is foremost in my mind:

FORBES.


As I have once again done my part to boost the 28+ page, and growing free-advertising thread for the ShadowDark RPG.

I will resume my normal holding pattern:

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 24, 2023, 12:52:51 PM

Quote from: Festus on March 24, 2023, 12:05:07 AM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 23, 2023, 11:12:23 PM

Quote from: Festus on March 23, 2023, 10:38:54 PM

I believe the sequence of events was roughly:
1. She wrote it using OGL, and had already announced the KS launch date.
2. Then WotC made noises about revoking OGL and she consulted with lawyers and started scrubbing the doc of any WotC IP that might be a problem. For example there was a version where stirges became "stingbats"
3. Then WotC caved and put the 5.1 SRD into CC.
4. To avoid the KS launch date slipping she included the CC attribution and carried on with the ready-for-the-printers manuscript.

I might have misstated or omitted some details, but that's the gist.

She's never made any bones about this being an offshoot of D&D. She has published a bunch of 5e adventures and has expressed a fondness for the system. If the purity test is being adequately anti-5e or anti-WotC to please everyone here, she'll fail that for sure.

I think that's a flat out stupid purity test. Fact is that if every single one of her ~10k backers *and* all their friends never bought a WotC product ever again, WotC likely wouldn't even notice.

Whatever

Care to point to where ANYONE says it has to be anti-5e or anti-WotC or anti-ANYTHING?

Pointing out that using either the OGL or the CC By contributes to D&D's network effect isn't putting ANY requirement on her or her game, it's just pointing a fact that negates the game having a negative effect on D&D, something that has been stated (by people here, who I'm answering to) the game will do.

After that you can resume calling everyone a bigot.

*Laughing* Wow.

First, I wouldn't use "bigot" in relation to a bias for or against a game system or company. I reserve that word for more serious and impactful biases.
Second, this forum and thread are chock full of all sorts of anti-this and anti-that, especially anti-WotC, which I'm actually cool with. WotC sucks.
Third, SHARK praised the author saying "she took notice of WOTC's BS, and swiftly set herself up...to stomp on them, with style" and called it a 'very nice "Fuck You!" to WOTC"
Fourth, Steven Mitchell said "Anything that takes a bite out of WotC and their host of smug assholes is a net plus. "
THEN you chimed in that if the game used the OGL or CC it did anything but that.

So yeah, the context of the thread was *absolutely* about the author specifically being anti-WotC, taking notice, stomping on them, "fuck you", WotC's BS, WotC being smug assholes, and so on. But hey, sorry to have ruffled your feathers! Bless your heart.

*More laughing*

NOWHERE in your wall of text have you provided proof that ANYONE established a "purity test" (your own words) that the game or the developer have to be anti-ANYTHING.

Now, you can either provide it or admit you were wrong.

As for calling people a bigot, my bad, I mixed you with fingerrod.

I stated that *if* the purity test is being anti-WotC, she'd fail. And that I think such a test is dumb. I stand by that. If you think I'm wrong about that, that's ok. I'm fine with people disagreeing with me.

I did not accuse any specific person of promulgating such a test, though based on my short time here it strikes me as likely that some folks here feel that way. I've certainly known folks elsewhere who feel that way.

I know SHARK does *not* feel that way. He's happy to see WotC take a hit, but he's also praised Kelsey Dionne for her business acumen. If you're defending him, no need. I did not intend to imply he was using such a test. He quite evidently is not.

SHARK, my apologies sir! Like FingerRod, I have a high regard for your posts on this topic. If I've treated you unfairly, I am sorry.

My words clearly struck a nerve with you, Geeky, but I don't know you well enough to speculate as to why. And without knowing why, I honestly don't know if I'm sorry or not. And at this point I am beyond caring. So if this isn't enough, you'll just have to cope somehow.

Cheers!

Quote from: Jaeger on March 24, 2023, 01:15:58 PM

As I have once again done my part to boost the 28+ page, and growing free-advertising thread for the ShadowDark RPG.

I will resume my normal holding pattern:

Quote from: Jaeger on March 24, 2023, 01:15:58 PM

FORBES.

Okay, fair enough. I have Forbes blocked from my news feed, probably for similar reasons.