TheRPGSite

This question hit me in part, because of my latest rpg purchases.

I'm pretty selective in my gaming dollar nowadays. I'm no collector (refuse to pay collector prices for stuff, like even really really bad TSR products on the ebay is horrible).

So I buy stuff that interests me. What I've picked up lately, even though they're no longer in print, is the Solomon Kane rpg by peginc. (I bought the core book and monster book). But of course they're out of print.

I've had this thought over the years of like, oh who's got Lord of the Rings IP today? Oh, who has Conan? The problem is a company always loses the rights to produce gaming stuff (license runs out, whatever). So if you come to the party late, good luck finding stuff (I'd love to find ICE Merp stuff inexpensive......but.....)

The thing is is that I have been able to hack my D&D game over the years with media I really like so I really don't need an official licensed product. And it's been damn fun had by all (for example, I hacked in David Edding's Church Knights easily enough).

So why do we buy it? Do companies make good money off of licensed stuff (I remember when Margaret Weis Productions seemed to license everything)?

Are there certain games you feel just couldn't be hacked into your favorite rpg?

Thanks for any participation, I appreciate it.

There was a long stretch--perhaps best epitomized by MERP and WEG Star Wars--where the licensed RPGs were your best source for new background material for your favorite worlds. I don't think fandom was as concerned with 'canon' so much then, perhaps because a lot of those worlds were also dead or dormant outside of their RPG spinoffs.

Nowadays, with wikis, systemless reference books, and the like, this niche is no longer as relevant. But it was a major driver for a long time.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer on March 01, 2023, 10:55:30 AM
There was a long stretch--perhaps best epitomized by MERP and WEG Star Wars--where the licensed RPGs were your best source for new background material for your favorite worlds. I don't think fandom was as concerned with 'canon' so much then, perhaps because a lot of those worlds were also dead or dormant outside of their RPG spinoffs.

Nowadays, with wikis, systemless reference books, and the like, this niche is no longer as relevant. But it was a major driver for a long time.

That's a good point of consideration I hadn't thought about. My first thought is, but didn't the game designers just make stuff up whole cloth? Or were there like setting bibles they had to adhere to? Was the MERP stuff limited by certain published works (I'm ignorant on that sorry).

I have always wondered why as expensive as licenses can be and how little money there really is in designing game material (with the hours put in, etc) how licensed games can be worthwhile.

I don't buy licensed games because they are licensed.  It drags in canon that often isn't helpful.  It means a big chunk of budget went to the license instead of game design, development, or testing.  And let's get real, given how that works, and the relatively short timeline for a license, it's the testing that often suffers the most. 

I think Armchair Gamer is correct about the earlier appeal.  The success of the various GURPS source books kind of backs up that point.  No idea on the percentage, but there were people who bought those source books with no intention of playing them in GURPS.  You see the same thing with some of the "historical" lines in D&D and Design Mechanism's "Mythic .." series.  Heck, I suspect that the Harn line stays in business off of sales to people with no intention of using those books in the Harn system.  I'm sure there are more examples.  Point being, the "source book" was either not licensed or barely licensed for that book--not tying the fate of the whole game line to the license.

The biggest counter example, of course, is the WEG Star Wars games.  We'll never know what could have been had an errant shoe company fiasco not happened.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on March 01, 2023, 11:40:59 AM
I don't buy licensed games because they are licensed.  It drags in canon that often isn't helpful.  It means a big chunk of budget went to the license instead of game design, development, or testing.  And let's get real, given how that works, and the relatively short timeline for a license, it's the testing that often suffers the most. 

I think Armchair Gamer is correct about the earlier appeal.  The success of the various GURPS source books kind of backs up that point.  No idea on the percentage, but there were people who bought those source books with no intention of playing them in GURPS.  You see the same thing with some of the "historical" lines in D&D and Design Mechanism's "Mythic .." series.  Heck, I suspect that the Harn line stays in business off of sales to people with no intention of using those books in the Harn system.  I'm sure there are more examples.  Point being, the "source book" was either not licensed or barely licensed for that book--not tying the fate of the whole game line to the license.

The biggest counter example, of course, is the WEG Star Wars games.  We'll never know what could have been had an errant shoe company fiasco not happened.

True for me I could hit some wikis and webpages, get setting information and run it in (for example) Savage Worlds which I know and love) and is easy to covert things into.  No need to buy a $60 0r $70 book I really dont need.

Quote from: Thorn Drumheller on March 01, 2023, 11:02:41 AM
That's a good point of consideration I hadn't thought about. My first thought is, but didn't the game designers just make stuff up whole cloth? Or were there like setting bibles they had to adhere to?

WEG made up a ton of Star Wars stuff that made its way into permanent canon. You see it in eg Andor with the ISB.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on March 01, 2023, 11:40:59 AM
I don't buy licensed games because they are licensed.  It drags in canon that often isn't helpful.  It means a big chunk of budget went to the license instead of game design, development, or testing.  And let's get real, given how that works, and the relatively short timeline for a license, it's the testing that often suffers the most. 

I think Armchair Gamer is correct about the earlier appeal.  The success of the various GURPS source books kind of backs up that point.  No idea on the percentage, but there were people who bought those source books with no intention of playing them in GURPS.  You see the same thing with some of the "historical" lines in D&D and Design Mechanism's "Mythic .." series.  Heck, I suspect that the Harn line stays in business off of sales to people with no intention of using those books in the Harn system.  I'm sure there are more examples.  Point being, the "source book" was either not licensed or barely licensed for that book--not tying the fate of the whole game line to the license.

The biggest counter example, of course, is the WEG Star Wars games.  We'll never know what could have been had an errant shoe company fiasco not happened.

Yeah, I get ya. I stay away from licensed stuff, unless I want it for whatever reason (like my latest purchase).

I don't want to play in Star Wars, I'd much rather play a Stars Without Numbers with SW elements. I don't want to play in Middle-earth, I'd rather steal what I like and put it in my D&D game.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying if you had a great middle-earth game using TOR rules you're bad wrong...more power to you. But that has zero appeal to me.

Quote from: Thorn Drumheller on March 01, 2023, 10:53:04 AM
So why do we buy it? Do companies make good money off of licensed stuff (I remember when Margaret Weis Productions seemed to license everything)?

Are there certain games you feel just couldn't be hacked into your favorite rpg?

It implied here that licensed RPG designs aren't as good, and that one's favorite RPG is unlicensed. But some of my favorite RPG designs are licensed. Sometimes a good designer can put their best work into trying to make a system that works well for a given property. I can think of a few examples.

1) Call of Cthulhu (1980). This technically took from RuneQuest, but it was a thorough redesign that is still probably the leading horror RPG.

2) The James Bond 007 RPG system (1983). This is a terrific system that puts quality of success front and center. It has a great implementation of Hero Points and chases in particular.

3) The Star Wars D6 system (1987). This is the great cinematic pulp action system. (Technically it started with the lesser-known Ghostbusters RPG, but that was also licensed.)

4) The Buffy the Vampire Slayer RPG system (2002). This was called the "Cinematic Unisystem". Some mechanics are taken from the Unisystem of Carella's Witchcraft RPG, but there are a ton of changes that not only streamline it but changed the focus and tone to give a cinematic feel.


While #1 and #4 were technically based on pre-existing non-licensed RPGs, they were far more than just adaptations like a GURPS book. The adapted system supplanted the original because of how well it was adapted. I'd play all of these purely on the strength of the game design, not because of the license. I'd also give a shout-out to the TSR Marvel Superheroes RPG (aka FASERIP).

James Bond was based on Dragon Quest.  It's even some of the same people working on it.  Arguably, you could back fill the JB rules into DQ and make it a better game.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on March 01, 2023, 12:55:12 PM
James Bond was based on Dragon Quest.  It's even some of the same people working on it.  Arguably, you could back fill the JB rules into DQ and make it a better game.

Interesting. I didn't know that.

Do you know if there were non-licensed forebearers to Ghostbusters or Marvel Superheroes/FASERIP? As far as I know, they weren't directly adapted from anything except in the same way that essentially all RPGs draw from previous RPGs.

I buy "licensed" games sometimes, but not because of the license. Rather, it's because I like the setting.

To me, the benefit to a "licensed" game is that you have a wider scope of lore: movies, books, cultural references, whatever. The more options you have, the easier it is to get a sense of the setting.

I'm putting "licensed" in quotes because the game doesn't have to be officially licensed to gain this benefit.

I'm running Hyperborea at the moment. Part of my prep is listening to a ton of Clark Ashton Smith stories in audiobook format. The setting is based on his work (but not licensed AFAIK) and I have limited time to sit down and read, so listening while driving is super convenient.

Quote from: jhkim on March 01, 2023, 12:59:48 PM
Interesting. I didn't know that.

Do you know if there were non-licensed forebearers to Ghostbusters or Marvel Superheroes/FASERIP? As far as I know, they weren't directly adapted from anything except in the same way that essentially all RPGs draw from previous RPGs.

All I know about the FASERIP line of design is what I've learned from you guys here. :D  My superheroes phase was all Champions, and I just don't do it enough to learn something new.  Haven't done a superheroes game in over 20 years.

Quote from: Thorn Drumheller on March 01, 2023, 11:02:41 AM
That's a good point of consideration I hadn't thought about. My first thought is, but didn't the game designers just make stuff up whole cloth? Or were there like setting bibles they had to adhere to? Was the MERP stuff limited by certain published works (I'm ignorant on that sorry).

Well, certainly to some extent. I know less about MERP, but I know WEG Star Wars just sorta became part of the EU, and to some extent it was reciprocal Some of the stuff that originated in the RPG would find its way into the EU in other places.

Ultimately, though, to me the question is really no different than "what do you play more than one system?" It's the same basic answer - because I don't think one system suits every game type. Sure, I *can* hack D&D to run a moden supernatural vampire game, but it's probably not my best bet.

Glad to see the WEG Star Wars comments...that game most likely, quite literally, saved that entire franchise. Best roleplaying game ever made based on one of the best movie series ever made, so it worked about as well as possible. Had the game sucked ass I doubt we would have heard much more about SW, but thankfully it was the ultimate marriage of system and atmosphere.

That "errant shoe company fiasco" is something I found out way after the fact. I kept wondering how a company that made some of the best products in the industry ever went out of business, but now I know.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on March 01, 2023, 11:40:59 AM
The biggest counter example, of course, is the WEG Star Wars games.  We'll never know what could have been had an errant shoe company fiasco not happened.

Quote from: Brad on March 01, 2023, 03:02:39 PM
Glad to see the WEG Star Wars comments...that game most likely, quite literally, saved that entire franchise. Best roleplaying game ever made based on one of the best movie series ever made, so it worked about as well as possible. Had the game sucked ass I doubt we would have heard much more about SW, but thankfully it was the ultimate marriage of system and atmosphere.

That "errant shoe company fiasco" is something I found out way after the fact. I kept wondering how a company that made some of the best products in the industry ever went out of business, but now I know.

Bolding mine, care to explain? My Google-Fu is comming up with nothing.

Quote from: Thorn Drumheller on March 01, 2023, 11:02:41 AM
That's a good point of consideration I hadn't thought about. My first thought is, but didn't the game designers just make stuff up whole cloth? Or were there like setting bibles they had to adhere to? Was the MERP stuff limited by certain published works (I'm ignorant on that sorry).

   The general rule in the early days was 'take whatever the official material establishes, and then run with or fill in the gaps.' Again, as I recall it (but I wasn't involved in organized fandom or the like), there was a lot less angst about 'canon' vs 'non-canon', largely because no one thought anything was 'canon' aside from the original works. Again, lots of these properties were more or less dead or only producing something like a movie every few years, so fans needed some way to get their fix. :)

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on March 01, 2023, 11:40:59 AM
I don't buy licensed games because they are licensed.  It drags in canon that often isn't helpful.  It means a big chunk of budget went to the license instead of game design, development, or testing.  And let's get real, given how that works, and the relatively short timeline for a license, it's the testing that often suffers the most. 

I think Armchair Gamer is correct about the earlier appeal.  The success of the various GURPS source books kind of backs up that point.  No idea on the percentage, but there were people who bought those source books with no intention of playing them in GURPS.  You see the same thing with some of the "historical" lines in D&D and Design Mechanism's "Mythic .." series.  Heck, I suspect that the Harn line stays in business off of sales to people with no intention of using those books in the Harn system.  I'm sure there are more examples.  Point being, the "source book" was either not licensed or barely licensed for that book--not tying the fate of the whole game line to the license.

The biggest counter example, of course, is the WEG Star Wars games.  We'll never know what could have been had an errant shoe company fiasco not happened.

Greetings!

*Laughing* Steven, yes, ye indeed. I am one of those people. I have a *huge* collection of GURPS books--Rome, the Celts, Russia, Mongols, Aztecs, Britain, China, Japan, and more, I'm sure. I don't run or play GURPS. I have bought them--and collected them--simply for reading and reference. They provide lots of awesome inspiration for doing whatever kind of fantasy history, regardless of what particular game system that you choose to use for the campaign.

I love those GURPS books! ;D

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 01, 2023, 03:14:23 PM

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on March 01, 2023, 11:40:59 AM
The biggest counter example, of course, is the WEG Star Wars games.  We'll never know what could have been had an errant shoe company fiasco not happened.

Quote from: Brad on March 01, 2023, 03:02:39 PM
Glad to see the WEG Star Wars comments...that game most likely, quite literally, saved that entire franchise. Best roleplaying game ever made based on one of the best movie series ever made, so it worked about as well as possible. Had the game sucked ass I doubt we would have heard much more about SW, but thankfully it was the ultimate marriage of system and atmosphere.

That "errant shoe company fiasco" is something I found out way after the fact. I kept wondering how a company that made some of the best products in the industry ever went out of business, but now I know.

Bolding mine, care to explain? My Google-Fu is comming up with nothing.

It was new to me too, but I saw this from Wikipedia:

QuoteIn July 1998, West End Games went into bankruptcy, following mismanagement between West End Games and its then-parent company, shoe importer Bucci Retail Group.  When the parent company filed for bankruptcy, West End Games was forced to go under as well, despite an attempt by Palter to perform a Chapter 11 reorganization of the company's finances. As a result, former WEG designers Costikyan and Goldberg took Palter to court over ownership of Paranoia, and in 2000, the courts ruled that the license should revert to Costikyan and Goldberg.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_End_Games

Quote from: GhostNinja on March 01, 2023, 11:33:04 AM
I have always wondered why as expensive as licenses can be and how little money there really is in designing game material (with the hours put in, etc) how licensed games can be worthwhile.

I guess it's because they think they'll get a larger audience, making up for the increased costs. Plus it helps with gamers looking for groups; if you're looking for a group for a generic sci-fi game, I don't know what the setting and feel of the game will be. But if you're after a group for a Star Wars RPG, then that gives me a pretty good idea of what the world and adventures will be like.

Quote from: Krazz on March 01, 2023, 03:59:28 PM
I guess it's because they think they'll get a larger audience, making up for the increased costs. Plus it helps with gamers looking for groups; if you're looking for a group for a generic sci-fi game, I don't know what the setting and feel of the game will be. But if you're after a group for a Star Wars RPG, then that gives me a pretty good idea of what the world and adventures will be like.

Yeah I guess that makes sense

Sorry, I thought the WEG and shoe company thing was common knowledge now.  John Kim's link is what you need to know.  Main point for this discussion was that WEG Star Wars was an "exception that proves the rule".  Had it not been derailed by something completely unrelated to the game, they might have kept the license long enough to be practically entrenched in gamers' heads.  I doubt anyone could have survived the sellout of Star Wars to Disney, but it might not have mattered by then.

I often think it's because when newer gamers discover there's something other than D&D they don't know how these things go in the long run.  They don't have the view of the three to six preceeding systems for the same license.

Never got around to this. Since you've asked, a system-neutral setting/campaign guide would have sufficed, so never will

Quote from: jhkim on March 01, 2023, 12:41:12 PM

1) Call of Cthulhu (1980). This technically took from RuneQuest, but it was a thorough redesign that is still probably the leading horror RPG.

I would add Stormbringer as 1.5

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on March 01, 2023, 04:42:14 PM
Sorry, I thought the WEG and shoe company thing was common knowledge now.  John Kim's link is what you need to know.  Main point for this discussion was that WEG Star Wars was an "exception that proves the rule".  Had it not been derailed by something completely unrelated to the game, they might have kept the license long enough to be practically entrenched in gamers' heads.  I doubt anyone could have survived the sellout of Star Wars to Disney, but it might not have mattered by then.

As far as exceptions go, they did it before with Ghostbusters, then with SW. I think it has to do with the quality of the product.

I started with SW WEG, because my rich cousin brought it back from a trip to NY with his parents (fecking disgusting I know  ;D ), and I loved it and still holds a special place in my heart.

I no longer buy/play in licensed RPGs because I want to be The Hero, not a hero. So I rather have a more generic Space Opera, S&W, S&P, etc. to run/play. The extra rare exception to that rule is when I want to mine it for ideas, monsters, etc for my games.

Quote from: jhkim on March 01, 2023, 12:41:12 PM
It implied here that licensed RPG designs aren't as good, and that one's favorite RPG is unlicensed. But some of my favorite RPG designs are licensed. Sometimes a good designer can put their best work into trying to make a system that works well for a given property. I can think of a few examples.

I certainly agree with 1, 3 and 4. I don't know anything much about the James Bond RPG though.

As much as we justly give Evil Hat shit for their current antics, I'm still going to defend the Dresden Files RPG as being possibly the best iteration of FATE. That one single book is an immensely flexible, versatile system, and represents the setting well. In addition, a lot of love was put into the book, and the fact that they had access to the comic book art to illustrate it certainly didn't hurt anything.

The flip side of the coin is Mouseguard. Absolutely gorgeous book, fantastic production values - but the system is so wrapped up in it's very peculiar mode of play that it turned most people off. I can't even say that the system is *bad*, exactly, it just isn't something I want.

Quote from: Bruwulf on March 01, 2023, 06:53:16 PM
The flip side of the coin is Mouseguard. Absolutely gorgeous book, fantastic production values - but the system is so wrapped up in it's very peculiar mode of play that it turned most people off. I can't even say that the system is *bad*, exactly, it just isn't something I want.

That's another problem licensed systems have:  Expectations on play that may not fit the chosen system very well. In the case of Mouseguard, the author of the original comic wanted it done on a Burning Wheel - lite chassis.  So obviously it appeals to some people the way he wanted, which was evidently inline with some of the themes of the comic. 

Take Design Mechanism's Lyonesse as another example.  I love Runequest.  I love Design Mechanism's take on RQ.  Lyonesse is easily in my top 5 fantasy stories of all time, maybe top 3.  Yet, I'm hard pressed to think of a worse fit for that setting than RQ-based mechanics.  Again, obviously someone thought it was a good fit.  But then someone also thought that Robin Laws making a Dying Earth game based on talking like a character in a Dying Earth novel instead of playing a game set in Vance's setting.  Which makes me gag a little ever time I think about it. 

If a licensed game isn't going to reinforce the themes of the setting or ground you in it, what's the point.  OTOH, everyone approaches those ideas a little different. So if you do a good job with some themes, you alienate some of your audience, and if you don't it's probably bland enough that people wonder why you bothered.  If you get a bad match for system and/or designer, you might even go against the themes.  Damned if you do; damned if you don't; really and truly sent to the 9th circle if you screw up.

Hey, know that show/movie/book you really like? Well here's  pre-made RPG of it, so you can play in the universe. You don't need to know how to adapt another system to run the setting, it's all done for you. There are hopefully plenty of bad guys and adventures ready to go, just jump in!

I think some of you guys forget that inexperienced gamers play too. Not many people own generic games they use to hack settings, they just buy something designed to emulate the setting (for better or worse.)

Quote from: Armchair Gamer on March 01, 2023, 10:55:30 AM
There was a long stretch--perhaps best epitomized by MERP and WEG Star Wars--where the licensed RPGs were your best source for new background material for your favorite worlds. I don't think fandom was as concerned with 'canon' so much then, perhaps because a lot of those worlds were also dead or dormant outside of their RPG spinoffs.

Nowadays, with wikis, systemless reference books, and the like, this niche is no longer as relevant. But it was a major driver for a long time.

MERP is probably one of the few RPGs that have had more books purchased to read than to play. Excellent material, still is.

I feel like most non-licensed rpgs are written as if they're licensed rpgs. But somehow worse, because the rpg doubles as the source material's one-track plot. None of the runner ups to D&D have more than one campaign setting (aside from GURPS, obviously) and for the most part these campaign settings function more as straightjackets than toolboxes. It's obvious from the prevalence of metaplots and irrelevant repetitive lore bloat that the writers actually want to write novels and comics rather than games. The worst manifestation of this is the fandom inquisition that attacks you for not treating the lore as sacrosanct, even though it's a game where the only limit in your imagination. These fandoms don't want to play games, they want to stroke the writer's ego.

I've been working on a blog dedicated to Chaosium's old dead Nephilim game and I ran smack dab into this while researching the original French version. Here's a summary of the background (https://app.multiversalis.fun/en/universe/62/stories/600) that you can auto-translate using any modern browser. Notice how it is completely devoted to incredibly bizarre-sounding events that are going to be completely irrelevant to actual gameplay and takes all the fun out of investigating mysteries or GM's creativity by spelling everything out for you without any room for variation? That's what basically all long-running ttrpgs are like now. You're not expected to actually play them, you're expected to read the books for the lore and then go online to stroke the writer's ego with other sycophants.

Words cannot express how stupid and unfun I think this is. If writers want to make a passive media universe, then go do that. Publishing it under the guise of a ttrpg setting is dishonest and has only contributed to the ruination of this hobby.

Quote from: Grognard GM on March 02, 2023, 12:40:16 AM
Hey, know that show/movie/book you really like? Well here's  pre-made RPG of it, so you can play in the universe. You don't need to know how to adapt another system to run the setting, it's all done for you. There are hopefully plenty of bad guys and adventures ready to go, just jump in!

I think some of you guys forget that inexperienced gamers play too. Not many people own generic games they use to hack settings, they just buy something designed to emulate the setting (for better or worse.)

While any game can be twisted for anti-gamer purposes, licensed materials are readily leveraged for more confirmation bias while destroying the draw of the IP. You do make a fair point about new players, but I'd push harder for derivative/alternative products that don't add weight to bent knees. Although if new players only means more wokies, I'd rather no new players to let the entire big industry die off with a whimper.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 01, 2023, 06:35:42 PMI no longer buy/play in licensed RPGs because I want to be The Hero, not a hero. So I rather have a more generic Space Opera, S&W, S&P, etc. to run/play. The extra rare exception to that rule is when I want to mine it for ideas, monsters, etc for my games.

This is the biggest downside to licensed RPGs and it's closely related to how, in many licensed setting, the outcome of the central conflict is already knows to all the players. We all know that Luke and Vader kill the Emperor in any game set before then, the actions of the player characters cannot matter. (Which is the same reason I had no interest in the Obi-Wan or Andor shows).

But the other main issue is how most licensed setting just don't have enough depth. Last year an Alien RPG came out. It looked great and I'm sure the mechanics where decent, but how many times can you be trapped on a space ship with an alien before it gets old? And if you do too much beyond the scope of the source materials, then you lose the advantage you have over a generic game.

There's also the fact that, thanks to wikipedia, nobody needs to buy a licensed source book anymore to get the background material.

Quote from: hedgehobbit on March 02, 2023, 12:45:13 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 01, 2023, 06:35:42 PMI no longer buy/play in licensed RPGs because I want to be The Hero, not a hero. So I rather have a more generic Space Opera, S&W, S&P, etc. to run/play. The extra rare exception to that rule is when I want to mine it for ideas, monsters, etc for my games.

This is the biggest downside to licensed RPGs and it's closely related to how, in many licensed setting, the outcome of the central conflict is already knows to all the players. We all know that Luke and Vader kill the Emperor in any game set before then, the actions of the player characters cannot matter. (Which is the same reason I had no interest in the Obi-Wan or Andor shows).

But the other main issue is how most licensed setting just don't have enough depth. Last year an Alien RPG came out. It looked great and I'm sure the mechanics where decent, but how many times can you be trapped on a space ship with an alien before it gets old? And if you do too much beyond the scope of the source materials, then you lose the advantage you have over a generic game.

There's also the fact that, thanks to wikipedia, nobody needs to buy a licensed source book anymore to get the background material.

TBF, in the case of Star Wars you could choose to play AFTER the fall of the Empire. If you don't know/care much about the EU then it's a fair playground where conflicts can provide ample opportunities to be The Hero.

Say you're playing in an Imperial world after the emperor's death, what did the Imperial goons do? Probably set themselves as petty tyrants, there's your chance to shine, liberating one world of the Imperial goons. Then another, and another, etc.

Other settings lack this scope, take the Hyborian Age, what do you do? Play as a "totally not Conan" Cimmerian and conquer another kingdom instead of Aquilonia I guess?

Better to build a setting that resembles the Hyborian Age but without the baggage of the novels/movies/etc. now YOU can be The Hero with zero canon to stand in your way.

Same goes for Barsoom, which is why my Sword & Planet takes place in Venus and will include tools to generate other worlds, even Mars but different from what ERB did. So YOU can unleash your imagination as the GM or become The Hero as a player.

Quote from: hedgehobbit on March 02, 2023, 12:45:13 PM
This is the biggest downside to licensed RPGs and it's closely related to how, in many licensed setting, the outcome of the central conflict is already knows to all the players. We all know that Luke and Vader kill the Emperor in any game set before then, the actions of the player characters cannot matter. (Which is the same reason I had no interest in the Obi-Wan or Andor shows).

But why? Why does Luke have to kill the Emperor? And, an even broader question, why does that matter? There's a whole galaxy to do stuff in. Luke killing the Emperor is only a problem if (a) you're setting your game in a very narrow window of time, and in one specific place, and (b) if you aren't willing to say "yes, that may be how it happened in the movie, but in this game, Luke Skywalker got into a horrific land speeder accident."

Do you never use the canon from past versions of games or settings? Never do alt histories? I always assumed this was just how everyone did things.

Quote from: hedgehobbit on March 02, 2023, 12:45:13 PM
But the other main issue is how most licensed setting just don't have enough depth. Last year an Alien RPG came out. It looked great and I'm sure the mechanics where decent, but how many times can you be trapped on a space ship with an alien before it gets old? And if you do too much beyond the scope of the source materials, then you lose the advantage you have over a generic game.

On the other hand, this can be an issue. The problem with the Aliens license is that there's really nothing mechanically all that interesting about xenomorphs. They're just a monster. And outside of Xenomorphs, there's nothing to differentiate Aliens from... Hell, Traveler, or any number of other sci-fi RPGs.

Quote from: Bruwulf on March 02, 2023, 02:04:53 PM

On the other hand, this can be an issue. The problem with the Aliens license is that there's really nothing mechanically all that interesting about xenomorphs. They're just a monster. And outside of Xenomorphs, there's nothing to differentiate Aliens from... Hell, Traveler, or any number of other sci-fi RPGs.

Yes.  Akin to a Monopoly set with a reskinned theme than anything new.  In other words, all style, no substance.   

Quote from: Bruwulf on March 02, 2023, 02:04:53 PM

Quote from: hedgehobbit on March 02, 2023, 12:45:13 PM
This is the biggest downside to licensed RPGs and it's closely related to how, in many licensed setting, the outcome of the central conflict is already knows to all the players. We all know that Luke and Vader kill the Emperor in any game set before then, the actions of the player characters cannot matter. (Which is the same reason I had no interest in the Obi-Wan or Andor shows).

But why? Why does Luke have to kill the Emperor? And, an even broader question, why does that matter? There's a whole galaxy to do stuff in. Luke killing the Emperor is only a problem if (a) you're setting your game in a very narrow window of time, and in one specific place, and (b) if you aren't willing to say "yes, that may be how it happened in the movie, but in this game, Luke Skywalker got into a horrific land speeder accident."

Do you never use the canon from past versions of games or settings? Never do alt histories? I always assumed this was just how everyone did things.

I agree that there are simple answers -- but I also know that some people aren't satisfied with this. It's the same issue as gaming in historical settings, or many unique-to-RPG settings like Forgotten Realms or World of Darkness.

Some people don't like breaking with canon or even extending canon. Or even if the canon can technically be messed with, the game has a bias to prioritize the original canon. i.e. In Star Wars, the real hero is Luke - and if there are PC heroes they will be pale shadows of Luke at best. An example of this is the Amber Diceless RPG, which makes all of the characters of the novel series as "elders" who are much more powerful than the PCs. There is some tendency for PCs to be small fry sub-heroes who are overshadowed by the novel heroes Corwin and Merlin. There's a similar tendency with Middle Earth, with some games setting up PCs to be equivalent to 1st level D&D novices hugely overshadowed by the heroes of the novels.

I've generally pushed back against this, and had the PCs be HEROES equal to the heroes of the original material. It is not at all difficult. It's just a matter of how one sees the original. I described what I was thinking for a Middle Earth approach recently in this thread:

https://www.therpgsite.com/pen-paper-roleplaying-games-rpgs-discussion/savage-middle-earth/

Likewise, when I ran a James Bond 007 game, my premise was that James Bond really did retire in the 1980s (which was the end of Never Say Never Again). So
the PCs were the next round of double-oh agents who were each roughly his equal. When I ran Star Trek, the PCs had their own capital ship and were a famed crew on the level of Kirk's or the heroes of other series. etc.

TSR Marvel Superheroes was a great game back in the day (and the revised edition tweaks a few of the niggles). Well supported with stacks of supplements and adventures.

These days a licensed TTRPG is lucky to get half a dozen books/adventures because the suits that are in charge of handing the license out have unrealistic expectations. They see D&D numbers and expect millions to flow in.

The last three Marvel games were canned within 18 months-2 years of release. Any guesses as to how long the new one will last?

I won't expect it to have any kind of longevity. The playtest release was a damp squib with a universal panning on the various forums. I think they went back to the drawing board with some major stuff for the system but whether its enough to fix things and bring players on board I'm not so sure.

Some Marvel exec will bring it up at some low level meeting about how they sell more branded underwear and lunchboxes than RPGs and that will be it, canned again.

So why buy a doomed game, destined to be forgotten about and with few people remembering it, let alone owning or having played it?

Probably out of curiosity and it will go one the shelves with the other doomed versions of the game.

(Those were Marvel Saga, with cards, Marvel Universe, diceless and Marvel Heroic. That made a reasonable attempt at squishing Wasp onto the same team as Thor but it puts characters into three dice categories and doesn't play great, just ok, in my experience.)

Quote from: jhkim on March 02, 2023, 03:07:16 PM

Quote from: Bruwulf on March 02, 2023, 02:04:53 PM

Quote from: hedgehobbit on March 02, 2023, 12:45:13 PM
This is the biggest downside to licensed RPGs and it's closely related to how, in many licensed setting, the outcome of the central conflict is already knows to all the players. We all know that Luke and Vader kill the Emperor in any game set before then, the actions of the player characters cannot matter. (Which is the same reason I had no interest in the Obi-Wan or Andor shows).

But why? Why does Luke have to kill the Emperor? And, an even broader question, why does that matter? There's a whole galaxy to do stuff in. Luke killing the Emperor is only a problem if (a) you're setting your game in a very narrow window of time, and in one specific place, and (b) if you aren't willing to say "yes, that may be how it happened in the movie, but in this game, Luke Skywalker got into a horrific land speeder accident."

Do you never use the canon from past versions of games or settings? Never do alt histories? I always assumed this was just how everyone did things.

I agree that there are simple answers -- but I also know that some people aren't satisfied with this. It's the same issue as gaming in historical settings, or many unique-to-RPG settings like Forgotten Realms or World of Darkness.

Some people don't like breaking with canon or even extending canon. Or even if the canon can technically be messed with, the game has a bias to prioritize the original canon. i.e. In Star Wars, the real hero is Luke - and if there are PC heroes they will be pale shadows of Luke at best. An example of this is the Amber Diceless RPG, which makes all of the characters of the novel series as "elders" who are much more powerful than the PCs. There is some tendency for PCs to be small fry sub-heroes who are overshadowed by the novel heroes Corwin and Merlin. There's a similar tendency with Middle Earth, with some games setting up PCs to be equivalent to 1st level D&D novices hugely overshadowed by the heroes of the novels.

I've generally pushed back against this, and had the PCs be HEROES equal to the heroes of the original material. It is not at all difficult. It's just a matter of how one sees the original. I described what I was thinking for a Middle Earth approach recently in this thread:

https://www.therpgsite.com/pen-paper-roleplaying-games-rpgs-discussion/savage-middle-earth/

Likewise, when I ran a James Bond 007 game, my premise was that James Bond really did retire in the 1980s (which was the end of Never Say Never Again). So
the PCs were the next round of double-oh agents who were each roughly his equal. When I ran Star Trek, the PCs had their own capital ship and were a famed crew on the level of Kirk's or the heroes of other series. etc.

He who destroys the One Ring is The Hero, you're either playing as the Fellowship oir you're just a hero.

James Bond... The names is a marketing thing, but yes, even with James being around you can be other double Oh agaents with different missions to save the world, not the same as Middle Earth.

Star Trek:

Space:

The final frontier.

These are the voyages of the starship Enterprise.

Its 5-year mission:

To explore strange new worlds,

To seek out new life and new civilizations,

To boldly go where no man has gone before.

It is perfectly within the universe canon to have OTHER starships, we even see some while following the voyages of the Enterprise.

So, again, not the same as Middle Earth.

As for "alternate history" Star Wars where Luke died on a speedster... The mere fact that you'd need to say that diminishes my ability to immerse myself in the world, because I KNOW how it goes IN CANON.

But, again, it's a big universe, just choose to play AFTER the death of the Emperor and not on a world we've seen, freeing it from the Empire goons.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 02, 2023, 03:58:00 PM
As for "alternate history" Star Wars where Luke died on a speedster... The mere fact that you'd need to say that diminishes my ability to immerse myself in the world, because I KNOW how it goes IN CANON.

But, again, it's a big universe, just choose to play AFTER the death of the Emperor and not on a world we've seen, freeing it from the Empire goons.

So your preference is fine -- and I've had friends say things like this about CANON before as well. However, I trouble understanding why. So I'm hoping you can unpack some of the reasons behind your preference.

---

For example, my James Bond 007 campaign had an "alternate history" premise that James Bond retired in 1983 -- though in canon he continued to have adventures like View to a Kill, The Living Daylights, etc. It seemed like you didn't mind that split from canon, but you couldn't accept an alternate history of Luke Skywalker.

I suspect that it has something to do with how you regard the original Star Wars trilogy. That those stories are real in your mind, and you don't want them changed -- but you are OK with changing the canon storyline in other cases, like with the James Bond movies.

--

On a related note, you suggest that it's fine to have Star Wars adventures after the Emperor is killed -- but you imply that you wouldn't have Middle Earth adventures after Sauron is killed. I feel like both of these have a similar issue -- that the PCs adventures will feel either like minor mopping up after the REAL adventure has finished, or undermining the CANON adventure by having that they didn't really fix things so there needs to be more EPIC heroes.

I have run some Star Wars adventures after the emperor is killed, but I've made it have a change of focus -- especially on the fight over what the New Republic will be like. But I've also run some before the original movies, with it being clear that they could change continuity.

Quote from: jhkim on March 02, 2023, 04:51:56 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 02, 2023, 03:58:00 PM
As for "alternate history" Star Wars where Luke died on a speedster... The mere fact that you'd need to say that diminishes my ability to immerse myself in the world, because I KNOW how it goes IN CANON.

But, again, it's a big universe, just choose to play AFTER the death of the Emperor and not on a world we've seen, freeing it from the Empire goons.

So your preference is fine -- and I've had friends say things like this about CANON before as well. However, I trouble understanding why. So I'm hoping you can unpack some of the reasons behind your preference.

---

For example, my James Bond 007 campaign had an "alternate history" premise that James Bond retired in 1983 -- though in canon he continued to have adventures like View to a Kill, The Living Daylights, etc. It seemed like you didn't mind that split from canon, but you couldn't accept an alternate history of Luke Skywalker.

I suspect that it has something to do with how you regard the original Star Wars trilogy. That those stories are real in your mind, and you don't want them changed -- but you are OK with changing the canon storyline in other cases, like with the James Bond movies.

--

On a related note, you suggest that it's fine to have Star Wars adventures after the Emperor is killed -- but you imply that you wouldn't have Middle Earth adventures after Sauron is killed. I feel like both of these have a similar issue -- that the PCs adventures will feel either like minor mopping up after the REAL adventure has finished, or undermining the CANON adventure by having that they didn't really fix things so there needs to be more EPIC heroes.

I have run some Star Wars adventures after the emperor is killed, but I've made it have a change of focus -- especially on the fight over what the New Republic will be like. But I've also run some before the original movies, with it being clear that they could change continuity.

Let me expand: If you're playing in a different time period on Middle Earth AFTER Sauron is defeated I'm fine with that, it doesn't break canon because we don't know what happened after. Not the same as Playing in the same time period.

If you're running a View to a Kill WITHOUT Bond that breaks canon, so it's not the same. As for Bond retiring... We know 00 agents either die or retire, so it's not a big jump to have 00 agents running around after Bond retires, hell you can even have a new 007. You don't even need to retire Bond, we KNOW there's other agents.

Star Trek, we KNOW there's other starships, no one NEEDS to play in the Enterprise, just use the system, create your own starship and crew and the adventures (unless you're running it for non trekkies, then you can even supplant the crew and use the original adventures). So no canon breaking unless you want to run The Trouble with Tribbles with out the Enterprise crew for trekkies.

Star Wars, IF you want to kill Luke BEFORE he got into the Millenium Falcon it is canon breaking, stupid and unnecessary, you could play AFTER the Emperor's death with different characters in different adventures.

Notice that in each case you're pretty much using the universe and the rules to play not the IP. Which to me is the same as having a more generic Sword & Sorcery, High Fantasy, Espionage, Space Opera, Sci-Fi, etc setting with no actual ties to ANY IP.

For instance the campaign I'm preparing, it's my take on a "totally not Thundarr" game/world/universe. I'm gonna have obvious callbacks to it but it's not it, I want the feel not the constraints of the IP.

You of course are free to do whatever and to play as you like, as long as you're not trying to force anyone to play your way I see no way it affects me.

On the other hand I'm free to express MY opinion that certain things push me out of immersion and/or are not the optimal way to do it.

Quote from: jhkim on March 02, 2023, 03:07:16 PM
I agree that there are simple answers -- but I also know that some people aren't satisfied with this. It's the same issue as gaming in historical settings, or many unique-to-RPG settings like Forgotten Realms or World of Darkness.

Then that strikes me as a player problem, not a fundamental problem with licensed settings.

Quote from: jhkim on March 02, 2023, 03:07:16 PMSome people don't like breaking with canon or even extending canon.

Again, that's a player problem. Those players are not the target audience for licensed RPGs. There's no point in trying to cater to them, you never will.  It's like trying to make a superhero game to cater to people who fundamentally don't like supers as a genre, like myself. Don't try, I'm not your target market, and in doing so you're going to make the game less appealing to those who are.

Quote from: jhkim on March 02, 2023, 03:07:16 PMOr even if the canon can technically be messed with, the game has a bias to prioritize the original canon. i.e. In Star Wars, the real hero is Luke - and if there are PC heroes they will be pale shadows of Luke at best. An example of this is the Amber Diceless RPG, which makes all of the characters of the novel series as "elders" who are much more powerful than the PCs. There is some tendency for PCs to be small fry sub-heroes who are overshadowed by the novel heroes Corwin and Merlin. There's a similar tendency with Middle Earth, with some games setting up PCs to be equivalent to 1st level D&D novices hugely overshadowed by the heroes of the novels.

Well, that's just a fundamental problem with the Zero-to-Hero XP progression design of most RPGs - I can't speak to Amber, sorry, never been my cup of tea, in novels or in game. But there's no reason a Star Wars RPG has to make Luke use fundamentally different rules than PCs, except that Luke goes from 1st-level-nobody to 20th-level demigod slayer in the equivalent of about 3 adventures, because movies are movies.

There's no reason a GM can't give a 2nd level hobbit thief a magic McGuffin, tell him to drop it in a lava pool, and boom, he's The Hero! But that makes a good movie or novel, but a poor game.

Quote from: jhkim on March 02, 2023, 03:07:16 PMWhen I ran Star Trek, the PCs had their own capital ship and were a famed crew on the level of Kirk's or the heroes of other series. etc.

But all the same problems you're talking about are present in a Star Trek game! Just because you give the players their own ship and let them tool around the galaxy, you're either forced to expand the setting beyond the bounds of primary canon, or else the players are just sort of going to be going around in the shadows of Kirk or Picard, visiting the same planets, fighting the same enemies, etc.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 02, 2023, 05:15:08 PM
Star Wars, IF you want to kill Luke BEFORE he got into the Millenium Falcon it is canon breaking, stupid and unnecessary, you could play AFTER the Emperor's death with different characters in different adventures.

Your stupid and unnecessary is another person's fun and interesting. Alt history and alternate universe stores are pretty popular, last I checked.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 02, 2023, 05:15:08 PMNotice that in each case you're pretty much using the universe and the rules to play not the IP. Which to me is the same as having a more generic Sword & Sorcery, High Fantasy, Espionage, Space Opera, Sci-Fi, etc setting with no actual ties to ANY IP.

But some people want those ties. Just because I'm not following Luke Skywalker around like a torchbearer doesn't mean I'm not a Jedi, or not fighting the Empire, or in the Clone Wars, or something else.

Could I be a Star Knight, in touch with the Cosmic Essence, wielding a plasma saber, jumping through phase-space, fighting the Stellar Hegemony? Sure, I could design that game in any number of systems on my shelf... Or I could just pull my old WEG Star Wars books down off the shelf, and have it all done for me, and not feel like I'm playing the knockoff Chinese bootleg totally-not-Star Wars.

Quote from: Bruwulf on March 02, 2023, 05:23:44 PM

Quote from: jhkim on March 02, 2023, 03:07:16 PMWhen I ran Star Trek, the PCs had their own capital ship and were a famed crew on the level of Kirk's or the heroes of other series. etc.

But all the same problems you're talking about are present in a Star Trek game! Just because you give the players their own ship and let them tool around the galaxy, you're either forced to expand the setting beyond the bounds of primary canon, or else the players are just sort of going to be going around in the shadows of Kirk or Picard, visiting the same planets, fighting the same enemies, etc.

Right. I'm saying that it's not a problem for me -- and it hasn't been a problem for most of my players. However, I have talked to a few people who do have a problem with it. They have expressed opinions similar to GeekyBugle. I'd want to acknowledge that it's a preference, and I'm curious about how that preference works.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 02, 2023, 05:15:08 PM
If you're running a View to a Kill WITHOUT Bond that breaks canon, so it's not the same. As for Bond retiring... We know 00 agents either die or retire, so it's not a big jump to have 00 agents running around after Bond retires, hell you can even have a new 007. You don't even need to retire Bond, we KNOW there's other agents.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 02, 2023, 05:15:08 PM
Star Wars, IF you want to kill Luke BEFORE he got into the Millenium Falcon it is canon breaking, stupid and unnecessary, you could play AFTER the Emperor's death with different characters in different adventures.

I'm still stuck on the underlying difference here. Why is it OK for James Bond to retire because there are other agents who can take up the spy work -- but it's not OK for Luke Skywalker to be killed because there are other rebels who can take up the fight against the Empire?

Quote from: jhkim on March 02, 2023, 05:51:06 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 02, 2023, 05:15:08 PM
If you're running a View to a Kill WITHOUT Bond that breaks canon, so it's not the same. As for Bond retiring... We know 00 agents either die or retire, so it's not a big jump to have 00 agents running around after Bond retires, hell you can even have a new 007. You don't even need to retire Bond, we KNOW there's other agents.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 02, 2023, 05:15:08 PM
Star Wars, IF you want to kill Luke BEFORE he got into the Millenium Falcon it is canon breaking, stupid and unnecessary, you could play AFTER the Emperor's death with different characters in different adventures.

I'm still stuck on the underlying difference here. Why is it OK for James Bond to retire because there are other agents who can take up the spy work -- but it's not OK for Luke Skywalker to be killed because there are other rebels who can take up the fight against the Empire?

Are you really stumped?

Quote
The Empire Strikes Back

Luke flies off to Yavin to save his friends

Obi-Wan> "He was our only hope"

Yoda> "No, there is another"

Not ANYONE could turn Anakin back to the light side and defeat the Emperor.

Meanwhile in 007's universe as long as you have the training and pass the required tests ANYONE can be an agent and then become a 00 agent.

In Star Wars Killing Luke before the defeat/death of the Emperor BREAKS canon and throws me out of immersion.

In a spy game having one agent retire or even die doesn't, because we know those things happen. Furthermore you DON'T need to retire/kill Bond, we KNOW there's OTHER 00 agents around, we just don't see their adventures.

It's like killing Arthur in an Arthurian legends game and killing a G-Man in a gangbusters game and claiming both are the same.

I refuse to believe you're this dense.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 02, 2023, 06:22:25 PM

Quote from: jhkim on March 02, 2023, 05:51:06 PM
I'm still stuck on the underlying difference here. Why is it OK for James Bond to retire because there are other agents who can take up the spy work -- but it's not OK for Luke Skywalker to be killed because there are other rebels who can take up the fight against the Empire?

Not ANYONE could turn Anakin back to the light side and defeat the Emperor.

Meanwhile in 007's universe as long as you have the training and pass the required tests ANYONE can be an agent and then become a 00 agent.

In Star Wars Killing Luke before the defeat/death of the Emperor BREAKS canon and throws me out of immersion.

In a spy game having one agent retire or even die doesn't, because we know those things happen. Furthermore you DON'T need to retire/kill Bond, we KNOW there's OTHER 00 agents around, we just don't see their adventures.

It's like killing Arthur in an Arthurian legends game and killing a G-Man in a gangbusters game and claiming both are the same.

I refuse to believe you're this dense.

I don't agree. You're claiming that James Bond is some run-of-the-mill schmoe that anyone could replace if they just some training - the equivalent of a random G-Man. I don't think that's what the Bond films portray. They make Bond out as a legendary hero. He doesn't have mystic powers, but he's uniquely competent and lucky.

Luke Skywalker is also a uniquely powerful character within his universe, but I don't see how that prevents playing a "what if" that he wasn't around.

Quote from: jhkim on March 02, 2023, 06:39:02 PM

I don't agree. You're claiming that James Bond is some run-of-the-mill schmoe that anyone could replace if they just some training - the equivalent of a random G-Man. I don't think that's what the Bond films portray. They make Bond out as a legendary hero. He doesn't have mystic powers, but he's uniquely competent and lucky.

Luke Skywalker is also a uniquely powerful character within his universe, but I don't see how that prevents playing a "what if" that he wasn't around.

I think what he is saying is that in some cases, the character's arc is central to what makes the story resonate.  The usual suggestion with canon used in an RPG is to pick a point, split off from there, and then let things develop as they will.  Whatever happened before Time X is still there.  Players can come to the table with that understanding.  Anything that happened after is up for grabs.

However, stories aren't games.  Characters that seem fated reach back into the older parts of the setting, and change it's feel.  Not just anyone can simply walk into Mordor carrying the ring.  Not just anyone can defeat/redeem Vader.  Whereas, there really isn't any fate or even very much before/after with the Bond stories.  There's a nod to the progression of the character with his marriage and how that works out, which carries through at least in the Fleming books and the later Connery films.  By the time Roger Moore comes along, there's been a reset in the franchise.

Another way to say it is that if you want to do Star Wars where Luke Skywalker doesn't kill Vader, then what you are really doing is "Alternate History" Star Wars where Luke isn't fated, maybe not Vader's son, possible a nobody that dies early, or maybe doesn't even exist.  It's now a completely different story set in the Star Wars universe.  That's possible, but a very different prospect from playing 006.

Quote from: jhkim on March 02, 2023, 06:39:02 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 02, 2023, 06:22:25 PM

Quote from: jhkim on March 02, 2023, 05:51:06 PM
I'm still stuck on the underlying difference here. Why is it OK for James Bond to retire because there are other agents who can take up the spy work -- but it's not OK for Luke Skywalker to be killed because there are other rebels who can take up the fight against the Empire?

Not ANYONE could turn Anakin back to the light side and defeat the Emperor.

Meanwhile in 007's universe as long as you have the training and pass the required tests ANYONE can be an agent and then become a 00 agent.

In Star Wars Killing Luke before the defeat/death of the Emperor BREAKS canon and throws me out of immersion.

In a spy game having one agent retire or even die doesn't, because we know those things happen. Furthermore you DON'T need to retire/kill Bond, we KNOW there's OTHER 00 agents around, we just don't see their adventures.

It's like killing Arthur in an Arthurian legends game and killing a G-Man in a gangbusters game and claiming both are the same.

I refuse to believe you're this dense.

I don't agree. You're claiming that James Bond is some run-of-the-mill schmoe that anyone could replace if they just some training - the equivalent of a random G-Man. I don't think that's what the Bond films portray. They make Bond out as a legendary hero. He doesn't have mystic powers, but he's uniquely competent and lucky.

Luke Skywalker is also a uniquely powerful character within his universe, but I don't see how that prevents playing a "what if" that he wasn't around.

You missed the part where I said that you can play in whatever way you want?

No, Bond isn't your average secret agent, he's a 00 agent he's 007, meaning there's 001, 002, 003, 004, 005 & 006 at the bare minimum running around. Given that we know there's not many agents with the 00 moniker we can safely assume that if you're one you're almost as good as Bond. We don't need no lame "What if" while pretending we're still playing in the same universe.

Take Deadlands, is it a western game? or is it a fantasy game with western aesthetics on top? You can't have the confederacy not loose and then tell me we're playing in the same universe. You have created a different universe.

Same with Star Wars, in universe ONLY Luke or Leia could turn Anakin back to the light. So for your not a skywalker character to be The Hero and defeat the emperor you had to kill 2 of the main protagonists, which throws ME out of immersion. But it's your table and your game, I'll just bounce and go play something I like.

Likewise I wouldn't run such a game BECAUSE I wouldn't enjoy it as a player or GM, I rather (if it HAS TO BE SW) play right AFTER the Empire's defeat in a world outside of the screen in the movies. Because it's the only time period that gives me the freedom to do whatever I want and not go against what is canon.

But like I have said before, you do you boo.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on March 02, 2023, 06:51:44 PM

Quote from: jhkim on March 02, 2023, 06:39:02 PM

I don't agree. You're claiming that James Bond is some run-of-the-mill schmoe that anyone could replace if they just some training - the equivalent of a random G-Man. I don't think that's what the Bond films portray. They make Bond out as a legendary hero. He doesn't have mystic powers, but he's uniquely competent and lucky.

Luke Skywalker is also a uniquely powerful character within his universe, but I don't see how that prevents playing a "what if" that he wasn't around.

I think what he is saying is that in some cases, the character's arc is central to what makes the story resonate.  The usual suggestion with canon used in an RPG is to pick a point, split off from there, and then let things develop as they will.  Whatever happened before Time X is still there.  Players can come to the table with that understanding.  Anything that happened after is up for grabs.

However, stories aren't games.  Characters that seem fated reach back into the older parts of the setting, and change it's feel.  Not just anyone can simply walk into Mordor carrying the ring.  Not just anyone can defeat/redeem Vader.  Whereas, there really isn't any fate or even very much before/after with the Bond stories.  There's a nod to the progression of the character with his marriage and how that works out, which carries through at least in the Fleming books and the later Connery films.  By the time Roger Moore comes along, there's been a reset in the franchise.

Another way to say it is that if you want to do Star Wars where Luke Skywalker doesn't kill Vader, then what you are really doing is "Alternate History" Star Wars where Luke isn't fated, maybe not Vader's son, possible a nobody that dies early, or maybe doesn't even exist. It's now a completely different story set in the Star Wars universe.  That's possible, but a very different prospect from playing 006.

You got it almost to a T. Except it's not "completely different story set in the Star Wars universe", it's the exact same story in a universe that looks like but it's not the Star Wars Universe.

Where if you are playing AFTER the emperor's death then almost everything is up for grabs and YOU can be The Hero of the story, a new story, in the same universe, that no one knows where it will lead, so maybe you become a Sith or maybe you kill your friends, or a whole System. It's an open ended game, a sandbox no one knows what will happen.

Quote from: Bruwulf on March 02, 2023, 05:33:50 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 02, 2023, 05:15:08 PM
Star Wars, IF you want to kill Luke BEFORE he got into the Millenium Falcon it is canon breaking, stupid and unnecessary, you could play AFTER the Emperor's death with different characters in different adventures.

Your stupid and unnecessary is another person's fun and interesting. Alt history and alternate universe stores are pretty popular, last I checked.

It varies. On alternatehistory.com 90% of the fanfics are for Game of Thrones. After a while they get repetitive and blur together. I've read a half-dozen stories hinging on the horrifying revelation that the Stark's are descendants of the Night's Queen. In at least two of them, some of the Starks start the story as throwbacks to their Other heritage. It has its own tag: "otherblood starks". Last I remember anyhow. There's plenty other recurring fanfic tropes like that.

I only wish ttrpg writers were so creative

For licensed pen and paper RPGs based on relatively specific arcs, I think the truth has been available for a long ass time.  If the company that sells you the rules won't also sell you a huge set of adventures, you'll know your version of the world is a discount knock-off, instead of if you make up your own or use a template designed for the purpose.  The Star Wars d6 stuff is very well put together, has a lot of great expanded-universe content, and lets you play in a few different places.  Much of it got retconned away by Lucas himself though, as much of it used established EU lore for the emperor before he came to power, all of which contradicts the prequels.  So the moment Lucas turned and looked at the universe again, any story you were telling became crap outside of its own self.  What's the point of having a bunch of lore in books you pay for if it's going to get erased immediately?  To say nothing of Disney's insistence that only its latest extremely cucky canon is official, with all the EU stuff lumped together as "legacy", whereas previously there were different levels of canon so you could say to people on a forum "Ok this is set a decade after battle of Yavin and we are using C-canon for this timeline".

But enough about Star Wars, right?  Maybe their complete unwriting of bookshelves of cool shit is unique to them.  What about Warcraft?  That had a great d20 sourcebook that came out, and it was extremely respectful to the video game stuff, stepping around certain things that were obviously going to be explained in WoW at a later time.  It gave you a good explanation for everything that could be explained, everyone signed off on it- it was canon and you were good to go.

...Until you weren't.
Within a couple years, they had de-canonized the book and rewritten huge sections of stuff that happened before, retconning the games, the game manuals, and the book.  No attempt was made to patch this nor was any consideration given to the players of the mostly-defunct system.  Obviously, very few adventures were published.

Lesser sins were committed to players of Wheel of Time (unless you count the woke series, which no true fans do), Warhammer (though in fairness, new pen and paper versions come out, and their universe is vast enough that whatever you are doing is probably still canon), and likely others.

Then there's the fact that a lot of the game systems just jam whatever bespoke system the developer favors into it, making cursory attempts to fit key mechanics or concepts into it.  The Essence system, used for Power Rangers, GI Joe, and Transformers, is a great example, with it being a pretty good fit for GI Joe and a terrible fit for Transformers.  Jamming everything into d20 was a big trend in the 2000s, which isn't inherently ruinous but the level based system really isn't appropriate to tell stories in every universe.  You didn't strictly need that for a d20 system, by any means, but many simply did it anyway.

Still, if you're following some particular fandom and a pen and paper RPG comes out, there's no way you don't buy it, and there's no way you don't run like a year's worth of stuff out of it.  And I can provide my own guess as to why, to actually answer the question OP posed; it's because it provides a focal point for people who are into the fictional world to all congregate around.  Fans of any given thing will follow anything that moves, and an officially licensed RPG is definitely moving.  This is likely why so many people have good stories about fun times in a barely defined system from several years ago- they were all in a virtual room with a bunch of people hyped for the same thing, and they were given the parts to assemble a cool playground, and they did a good enough job to have a great time.

Quote from: Bruwulf on March 02, 2023, 05:33:50 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 02, 2023, 05:15:08 PM
Star Wars, IF you want to kill Luke BEFORE he got into the Millenium Falcon it is canon breaking, stupid and unnecessary, you could play AFTER the Emperor's death with different characters in different adventures.

Your stupid and unnecessary is another person's fun and interesting. Alt history and alternate universe stores are pretty popular, last I checked.

And your fun and interesting is another person's stupid and unnecessary. Alt-History and Alternate Universes are pretty popular, and billions of flies eat shit. You're not making any argument, furthermore I'm only stating MY tastes, which you find offensive.

Quote from: Bruwulf on March 02, 2023, 05:33:50 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 02, 2023, 05:15:08 PMNotice that in each case you're pretty much using the universe and the rules to play not the IP. Which to me is the same as having a more generic Sword & Sorcery, High Fantasy, Espionage, Space Opera, Sci-Fi, etc setting with no actual ties to ANY IP.

But some people want those ties. Just because I'm not following Luke Skywalker around like a torchbearer doesn't mean I'm not a Jedi, or not fighting the Empire, or in the Clone Wars, or something else.

Could I be a Star Knight, in touch with the Cosmic Essence, wielding a plasma saber, jumping through phase-space, fighting the Stellar Hegemony? Sure, I could design that game in any number of systems on my shelf... Or I could just pull my old WEG Star Wars books down off the shelf, and have it all done for me, and not feel like I'm playing the knockoff Chinese bootleg totally-not-Star Wars.

Yes, you're a hero, not The Hero, this doesn't deboonk my point. By all means have at it, I won't play that, which shouldn't diminish your fun in any way shape or form.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 02, 2023, 09:34:48 PM
And your fun and interesting is another person's stupid and unnecessary. Alt-History and Alternate Universes are pretty popular, and billions of flies eat shit. You're not making any argument, furthermore I'm only stating MY tastes, which you find offensive.

I don't give a shit what stupid game you play or how insufferably dull and unimaginative your tastes are. Until you start being a horse's ass about it. Like I just was to you.

It just doesn't seem conducive to honest discussion of an issue to just blithely declare one side of the argument "stupid and unnecessary".

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 02, 2023, 09:34:48 PMYes, you're a hero, not The Hero, this doesn't deboonk my point. By all means have at it, I won't play that, which shouldn't diminish your fun in any way shape or form.

You capitalizing the word one time and not the other doesn't actually make the two terms different. Setting aside that most RPGs expect group play, which makes there being a singular "The Hero" inherently difficult, players are The Hero of their own stories. A universe has room for more than one hero, more than one story. Universes are big.

How many people seriously buy a licensed setting to just retell the same story as in the movie they watched, or read in the book? I'm sure some, perhaps, but I seriously question if that's the majority.

Quote from: Bruwulf on March 02, 2023, 10:11:41 PM
A universe has room for more than one hero, more than one story. Universes are big.

How many people seriously buy a licensed setting to just retell the same story as in the movie they watched, or read in the book? I'm sure some, perhaps, but I seriously question if that's the majority.

I don't think all universes are big, at least as the interesting things about that universe go.  When Star Wars came out, they made it pretty clear that there weren't any Jedi left- it was a rather salient point of the movie.  Years later, we've seen that every canon stretches that.  Suddenly every corner of the universe not watching Obi-Wan is full of force users of varying power, all conveniently not present during the actions of the main trilogy, as such people would have definitely shown up to fight a death star (or two).

Similarly, in a wheel of time game, there's only so much space for Aes Sedai to be hanging around far away from the main characters, though it's much more defensible as a setting when compared to Star Wars.  Most settings don't leave room for anyone else to be doing The Cool Thing except for the main characters, after all.

Many settings do a full wrapup once things are done, allowing for no meaningful other adventures.  This, at least, does not plague Star Wars.

Quote from: Venka on March 02, 2023, 10:19:23 PM

I don't think all universes are big, at least as the interesting things about that universe go.  When Star Wars came out, they made it pretty clear that there weren't any Jedi left- it was a rather salient point of the movie.  Years later, we've seen that every canon stretches that.  Suddenly every corner of the universe not watching Obi-Wan is full of force users of varying power, all conveniently not present during the actions of the main trilogy, as such people would have definitely shown up to fight a death star (or two).

Well, sure. Aliens was already mentioned... Once you get past the signature monster, there's not really anything to the setting. Yeah, you could roleplay being Weyland-Yutani colonists, or space marines, or something... But your options are either keep finding ways to make the one, singular thing that makes the Aliens universe interesting, well, interesting... Or else to play an absolutely generic sci-fi setting that has nothing that sets it apart from any other.

Star Wars, like a lot of settings, really wasn't very fleshed out. Taking just the first (only) three movies, we have a lot of questions. Was being a Jedi just something you learned? Was it hereditary? What did it mean to say there were no more Jedi? Did all Jedi vanish and become force ghosts when they died? What was the real nature of a Jedi's powers? We didn't know any of that. So of course it was one of the first things people started to explore in fan fictions, and later of course in roleplaying games.

We also didn't know how big the universe was, or how wide the Empire was. Hell, other than some borrowed Nazi iconography and the fact they were willing to destroy a planet to make a point, we really didn't even know anything about the Empire. So, of course, those were other topics that got explored a lot.

But the point here, there were these questions, and they were interesting concepts to explore and made for interesting potential characters... And when the Star Wars RPG came out, WEG was really good about *answering* those questions, even if only within the scope of their personal game canon. They took a universe that was almost infinite in potential scope, but not really well developed, and developed it. And in doing so, they spread the universe wide open for people to tell their own stories and be their own big damned heroes.

Quote from: Venka on March 02, 2023, 10:19:23 PMSimilarly, in a wheel of time game, there's only so much space for Aes Sedai to be hanging around far away from the main characters, though it's much more defensible as a setting when compared to Star Wars.  Most settings don't leave room for anyone else to be doing The Cool Thing except for the main characters, after all.

True enough to an extent, if you're not willing to do anything like running an alt-history game, or setting the game in an earlier time period, or something.

But, again, I don't think most people buy into licensed settings to just play characters operating in the shadows of the canon heroes. I think they're looking at the setting as a pre-developed toybox. They want to play with the cool toys. They want to be a jedi, or an Aes Sedai, or to have adventures in the Nevernever, or whatever elements make those settings unique. They want to tell their own stories that are similar to the existing ones, but aren't just... copying them, or hanging out with the main characters like some sort of bizarre imaginary club.

Quote from: Bruwulf on March 02, 2023, 10:11:41 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 02, 2023, 09:34:48 PM
And your fun and interesting is another person's stupid and unnecessary. Alt-History and Alternate Universes are pretty popular, and billions of flies eat shit. You're not making any argument, furthermore I'm only stating MY tastes, which you find offensive.

I don't give a shit what stupid game you play or how insufferably dull and unimaginative your tastes are. Until you start being a horse's ass about it. Like I just was to you.

It just doesn't seem conducive to honest discussion of an issue to just blithely declare one side of the argument "stupid and unnecessary".

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 02, 2023, 09:34:48 PMYes, you're a hero, not The Hero, this doesn't deboonk my point. By all means have at it, I won't play that, which shouldn't diminish your fun in any way shape or form.

You capitalizing the word one time and not the other doesn't actually make the two terms different. Setting aside that most RPGs expect group play, which makes there being a singular "The Hero" inherently difficult, players are The Hero of their own stories. A universe has room for more than one hero, more than one story. Universes are big.

How many people seriously buy a licensed setting to just retell the same story as in the movie they watched, or read in the book? I'm sure some, perhaps, but I seriously question if that's the majority.

The Heroes are the protagonists, the main characters. meanwhile some heroes are secondary or tertiary characters, not the main protagonists, which makes it totally different.

You seem to not have read or misunderstood where I say that you could play (in star wars case) AFTER the death of the Emperor, that's not re-telling the same story, is it?

Doing that means you're not worried about what The Main Protagonists are doing and if your actions will affect them.

Of course if you just declare that this is a different universe then you can do whatever (something I already said too), b ut that's not the same universe, it's an alternate one.

Like I already said, you can't declare the Confederates didn't loose the Secession war and pretend it's the same universe, it's not.

You can't have ghostrock and pretend is the same universe where that doesn't exist.

You can't kill of Luke and pretend it's the same universe.

If that's what floats your boat have at it, I'll go play in the real Star Wars Universe AFTER the Emperor was defeated and be the main character and not a third row extra.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 02, 2023, 11:03:02 PM
The Heroes are the protagonists, the main characters. meanwhile some heroes are secondary or tertiary characters, not the main protagonists, which makes it totally different.

Only if they're in the same story. Not the same universe, the same story. Odysseus is not somehow not the protagonist of The Odyssey, just because Achilles was the protagonist of The Iliad, set in the same basic "universe". And I could run a game set in mythological ancient Greece, a setting where both characters existed, and have my characters tell their own stories of which they are the protagonist.

If I run a game in the Star Wars universe, I'm not going to be telling Luke's story. That story has been told. My players would be the protagonist of the story they and I are telling, not somehow philosophically relegated to being Luke's Short Round or something.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 02, 2023, 11:03:02 PMYou seem to not have read or misunderstood where I say that you could play (in star wars case) AFTER the death of the Emperor, that's not re-telling the same story, is it?

Literally what is there to comment on that statement? It's self-evidently true. Although maybe not these days... whether you take into account the original EU or the new Disneyslop EU, unless you just freeze your Star Wars as being wholly contained in the first three movies, you can't really say that - there's still going to be other protagonists telling other stories at the same time that you're apparently "competing" with or something.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 02, 2023, 11:03:02 PMDoing that means you're not worried about what The Main Protagonists are doing and if your actions will affect them.

Never have been.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 02, 2023, 11:03:02 PMOf course if you just declare that this is a different universe then you can do whatever (something I already said too), b ut that's not the same universe, it's an alternate one.

I suppose, in a sense. I would argue that "an alternative universe" would be literally any game played in an RPG of a licensed setting, and that's what most players want and expect. Regardless of if you go so far as to massively rewrite canon or not.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 02, 2023, 11:03:02 PMLike I already said, you can't declare the Confederates didn't loose the Secession war and pretend it's the same universe, it's not.

You can't have ghostrock and pretend is the same universe where that doesn't exist.

You can't kill of Luke and pretend it's the same universe.

I think what we're running into here is two similar, but not exactly parallel, definitions of "universe".

To use Star Trek as an example, Star Trek has had several stories with either alternate timelines or alternate universes. And I'm not even talking things like the so-called Abrams-verse or whatever, I mean even within one single series... You have the Mirror universe, time travel shenanigans, Q screwing around with things, and what have you.

Lets say I wanted to run a game set entirely in a Mirror Universe Star Trek setting. Am I still running it in the "Star Trek Universe"? By one definition, no, clearly not. By another definition, I would argue, yes.

No, if you want slavish devotion to exactly the story as written with no deviation, it won't suit you. But I don't think that's why most people buy or play licensed settings. As I aid, it's not "I want to be an actor in an amateur theater production of A New Hope", it's "I want to take a big ol' box of Star Wars toys and run around waving a lightsaber and going pew pew at evil bounty hunters with my friendly droid sidekick!".

For those purposes, it doesn't *matter* what Luke is doing, or if he's alive at all. His story is not your story. *He* doesn't *matter*. 

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 02, 2023, 11:03:02 PM
If that's what floats your boat have at it, I'll go play in the real Star Wars Universe AFTER the Emperor was defeated and be the main character and not a third row extra.

You aren't playing in the "real" Star Wars setting unless you're getting paid by the mouse. And if you aren't the protagonist of your own stories, you need a new GM.

Bugle's understanding of what is the "real" universe is closer to my own.  If you are adding in a non-contradictory way to the canon events, then you are in the "real" fictional universe.  If you are changing them (for instance, if you assassinate Boba Fett as he emerges from the Sarlacc), then your universe isn't compatible with the "real" one in the fiction.

Basically if you say "my universe here is just like Frank Herbert's Dune, except we are having adventures on Caladan after the Atreides leave", then that's pretty much in the "real" Dune universe, because nothing you are doing contradicts with what goes on in the books, and your characters might even get a chance to react to the events in the greater world as they unfold.

I get that you can say that everything that adds or subtracts isn't the "real" universe, but honestly, I just don't believe it.  If everything in the source documents is true for your game world, then you are 100% in their universe.  And if you tell a story in a given Star Wars canon, then yours is just as official as Disney's, and it cost you a billion dollars less for that legitimacy.

I guess my Grey Box/Bloodstone Lands Forgotten Realms game with no 'Time of Troubles' isn't the 'real' Forgotten Realms.  ;D One thing I noticed though was that even using only material from the first couple years of FR, there are a ton of contradictions in the material, so I still have to decide what to use IMC. I think this is true of pretty well all official universes - the James Bond setting may have more than the Star Wars setting, but neither is consistent. The GM always has to decide what to use - and in doing so, engage in a creative act.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on March 02, 2023, 06:51:44 PM
Characters that seem fated reach back into the older parts of the setting, and change it's feel.  Not just anyone can simply walk into Mordor carrying the ring.  Not just anyone can defeat/redeem Vader.  Whereas, there really isn't any fate or even very much before/after with the Bond stories.  There's a nod to the progression of the character with his marriage and how that works out, which carries through at least in the Fleming books and the later Connery films.  By the time Roger Moore comes along, there's been a reset in the franchise.

Another way to say it is that if you want to do Star Wars where Luke Skywalker doesn't kill Vader, then what you are really doing is "Alternate History" Star Wars where Luke isn't fated, maybe not Vader's son, possible a nobody that dies early, or maybe doesn't even exist.  It's now a completely different story set in the Star Wars universe.  That's possible, but a very different prospect from playing 006.

I'm trying to follow along, but I'm not sure what the core is for you. I agree that it's an "Alternate History" Star Wars if Luke isn't around. But I don't understand why it is not an "Alternate History" if James Bond isn't around. As I see it, any major change to the canon of the universe would mean that we're in an alternate history.

You imply that having mystic fate involved is a key to this. Luke is fated to defeat the Emperor, and Frodo is fated to defeat Sauron. So is this only an issue in universes with mystic fate? It seems to me a bigger feature is that while James Bond canon has a dozen or more mostly-unrelated storylines, Middle Earth is dominated by one storyline (Lord of the Rings) and Star Wars is arguably dominated by one storyline (the original trilogy).

What I'm not sure is how does this apply to other licenses? Playing the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles RPG if the canonical turtles didn't exist? Playing the Elric RPG without Elric or the Conan RPG without Conan? Dresden Files RPG without Harry Dresden?

Quote from: Venka on March 03, 2023, 01:34:18 AM
Bugle's understanding of what is the "real" universe is closer to my own.  If you are adding in a non-contradictory way to the canon events, then you are in the "real" fictional universe.  If you are changing them (for instance, if you assassinate Boba Fett as he emerges from the Sarlacc), then your universe isn't compatible with the "real" one in the fiction.

Basically if you say "my universe here is just like Frank Herbert's Dune, except we are having adventures on Caladan after the Atreides leave", then that's pretty much in the "real" Dune universe, because nothing you are doing contradicts with what goes on in the books, and your characters might even get a chance to react to the events in the greater world as they unfold.

I get that you can say that everything that adds or subtracts isn't the "real" universe, but honestly, I just don't believe it.  If everything in the source documents is true for your game world, then you are 100% in their universe.  And if you tell a story in a given Star Wars canon, then yours is just as official as Disney's, and it cost you a billion dollars less for that legitimacy.

This seems like a spectrum to me. Changing things is more likely to shift away from canon, but consider two hypotheticals:

1) A game set after the Emperor's death fighting the remnants of the Empire, where the *only* change is that Boba Fett dies in the Sarlacc.

2) A military action game set purely on a particular water world in the Old Republic era. Neither the world nor the inhabitants are in the canon, but there are thousands of worlds in canon, and nothing about this one contradicts the canon.

If most of the RPG campaign is all about source material that isn't in the canon, then how much does it really matter that the world is in the same universe as Star Wars? If there's no starships, no fight against the Empire and no Jedi, it isn't going to feel like Star Wars even if it technically fits into the universe.

Quote from: jhkim on March 03, 2023, 02:09:52 AM

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on March 02, 2023, 06:51:44 PM
Characters that seem fated reach back into the older parts of the setting, and change it's feel.  Not just anyone can simply walk into Mordor carrying the ring.  Not just anyone can defeat/redeem Vader.  Whereas, there really isn't any fate or even very much before/after with the Bond stories.  There's a nod to the progression of the character with his marriage and how that works out, which carries through at least in the Fleming books and the later Connery films.  By the time Roger Moore comes along, there's been a reset in the franchise.

Another way to say it is that if you want to do Star Wars where Luke Skywalker doesn't kill Vader, then what you are really doing is "Alternate History" Star Wars where Luke isn't fated, maybe not Vader's son, possible a nobody that dies early, or maybe doesn't even exist.  It's now a completely different story set in the Star Wars universe.  That's possible, but a very different prospect from playing 006.

I'm trying to follow along, but I'm not sure what the core is for you. I agree that it's an "Alternate History" Star Wars if Luke isn't around. But I don't understand why it is not an "Alternate History" if James Bond isn't around. As I see it, any major change to the canon of the universe would mean that we're in an alternate history.

You imply that having mystic fate involved is a key to this. Luke is fated to defeat the Emperor, and Frodo is fated to defeat Sauron. So is this only an issue in universes with mystic fate? It seems to me a bigger feature is that while James Bond canon has a dozen or more mostly-unrelated storylines, Middle Earth is dominated by one storyline (Lord of the Rings) and Star Wars is arguably dominated by one storyline (the original trilogy).

What I'm not sure is how does this apply to other licenses? Playing the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles RPG if the canonical turtles didn't exist? Playing the Elric RPG without Elric or the Conan RPG without Conan? Dresden Files RPG without Harry Dresden?

Quote from: Venka on March 03, 2023, 01:34:18 AM
Bugle's understanding of what is the "real" universe is closer to my own.  If you are adding in a non-contradictory way to the canon events, then you are in the "real" fictional universe.  If you are changing them (for instance, if you assassinate Boba Fett as he emerges from the Sarlacc), then your universe isn't compatible with the "real" one in the fiction.

Basically if you say "my universe here is just like Frank Herbert's Dune, except we are having adventures on Caladan after the Atreides leave", then that's pretty much in the "real" Dune universe, because nothing you are doing contradicts with what goes on in the books, and your characters might even get a chance to react to the events in the greater world as they unfold.

I get that you can say that everything that adds or subtracts isn't the "real" universe, but honestly, I just don't believe it.  If everything in the source documents is true for your game world, then you are 100% in their universe.  And if you tell a story in a given Star Wars canon, then yours is just as official as Disney's, and it cost you a billion dollars less for that legitimacy.

This seems like a spectrum to me. Changing things is more likely to shift away from canon, but consider two hypotheticals:

1) A game set after the Emperor's death fighting the remnants of the Empire, where the *only* change is that Boba Fett dies in the Sarlacc.

2) A military action game set purely on a particular water world in the Old Republic era. Neither the world nor the inhabitants are in the canon, but there are thousands of worlds in canon, and nothing about this one contradicts the canon.

If most of the RPG campaign is all about source material that isn't in the canon, then how much does it really matter that the world is in the same universe as Star Wars? If there's no starships, no fight against the Empire and no Jedi, it isn't going to feel like Star Wars even if it technically fits into the universe.

James Bond: How many times must I explain to you that we know of at least 6 other 00 agents? I can play as one of those, Bond is doing his thing, we don't interact. I'm not creating an alternate Universe, I'm creating different adventures with different characters in the same universe.

"What I'm not sure is how does this apply to other licenses? Playing the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles RPG if the canonical turtles didn't exist? Playing the Elric RPG without Elric or the Conan RPG without Conan? Dresden Files RPG without Harry Dresden? "

LOL WUT? I've said I don't want to play in the Hyborian Age, same goes for Elric, I would play in a setting like theirs but not theirs.

Haven't read the Dresden Files but given the name of the main character the same applies to this as to Conan.

Why would I need to remove the Turtles? I could play as them, or better yet not play it since it doesn't talk to me with or without the original turtles.

You CAN'T be this dense.

Bond is one agent out of who knows how many working for an agency, I can play as one of those other agents, I don't need to kill or retire Bond to do so, I just switch focus from him to other characters within the universe.

So, if MY PC dies the 007 canon isn't affected.

Nothing my character does needs impact Bond in any way shape or form in the hands of a semi competent GM. Me and my team are working different cases than his.

Say instead of trying to switch Bond for the black chick in the last movie they just presented the black chick as 006, she goes and does her thing. A year or two down the line they release a new Bond movie, now we have twice the 00Agent goodnes (if you consider the last movies good which I don't).

The one talking about killing or retiring Bond is YOU, I've told you there's no need for that, you're just filming a different movie centered around OTHER 00Agent's adventures.

Quote from: Bruwulf on March 02, 2023, 11:47:26 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 02, 2023, 11:03:02 PM
The Heroes are the protagonists, the main characters. meanwhile some heroes are secondary or tertiary characters, not the main protagonists, which makes it totally different.

Only if they're in the same story. Not the same universe, the same story. Odysseus is not somehow not the protagonist of The Odyssey, just because Achilles was the protagonist of The Iliad, set in the same basic "universe". And I could run a game set in mythological ancient Greece, a setting where both characters existed, and have my characters tell their own stories of which they are the protagonist.

If I run a game in the Star Wars universe, I'm not going to be telling Luke's story. That story has been told. My players would be the protagonist of the story they and I are telling, not somehow philosophically relegated to being Luke's Short Round or something.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 02, 2023, 11:03:02 PMYou seem to not have read or misunderstood where I say that you could play (in star wars case) AFTER the death of the Emperor, that's not re-telling the same story, is it?

Literally what is there to comment on that statement? It's self-evidently true. Although maybe not these days... whether you take into account the original EU or the new Disneyslop EU, unless you just freeze your Star Wars as being wholly contained in the first three movies, you can't really say that - there's still going to be other protagonists telling other stories at the same time that you're apparently "competing" with or something.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 02, 2023, 11:03:02 PMDoing that means you're not worried about what The Main Protagonists are doing and if your actions will affect them.

Never have been.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 02, 2023, 11:03:02 PMOf course if you just declare that this is a different universe then you can do whatever (something I already said too), b ut that's not the same universe, it's an alternate one.

I suppose, in a sense. I would argue that "an alternative universe" would be literally any game played in an RPG of a licensed setting, and that's what most players want and expect. Regardless of if you go so far as to massively rewrite canon or not.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 02, 2023, 11:03:02 PMLike I already said, you can't declare the Confederates didn't loose the Secession war and pretend it's the same universe, it's not.

You can't have ghostrock and pretend is the same universe where that doesn't exist.

You can't kill of Luke and pretend it's the same universe.

I think what we're running into here is two similar, but not exactly parallel, definitions of "universe".

To use Star Trek as an example, Star Trek has had several stories with either alternate timelines or alternate universes. And I'm not even talking things like the so-called Abrams-verse or whatever, I mean even within one single series... You have the Mirror universe, time travel shenanigans, Q screwing around with things, and what have you.

Lets say I wanted to run a game set entirely in a Mirror Universe Star Trek setting. Am I still running it in the "Star Trek Universe"? By one definition, no, clearly not. By another definition, I would argue, yes.

No, if you want slavish devotion to exactly the story as written with no deviation, it won't suit you. But I don't think that's why most people buy or play licensed settings. As I aid, it's not "I want to be an actor in an amateur theater production of A New Hope", it's "I want to take a big ol' box of Star Wars toys and run around waving a lightsaber and going pew pew at evil bounty hunters with my friendly droid sidekick!".

For those purposes, it doesn't *matter* what Luke is doing, or if he's alive at all. His story is not your story. *He* doesn't *matter*. 

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 02, 2023, 11:03:02 PM
If that's what floats your boat have at it, I'll go play in the real Star Wars Universe AFTER the Emperor was defeated and be the main character and not a third row extra.

You aren't playing in the "real" Star Wars setting unless you're getting paid by the mouse. And if you aren't the protagonist of your own stories, you need a new GM.

Yes, Trek was always a silly show, I love it but it was a mess since the OS and became worst which each new show and movie and I'm not even counting the Abrahams abominations.

Which is why I said several posts ago that there you can just have your own starship, exploring a different space sector and there's exactly zero conflict.

Star wars: No, anything disney isn't canon to me. The original EU... Well some I do respect because it makes sense, some I disregard because it doesn't, some I fucking hate because it's shit.

Bond is the same as Trek, since there's other 00Agents around, you just shift focus to them instead of Bond who is out there doing his thing.

Yes, I'm playing in "The Real Star Wars Universe" TM because anything Disney doesn't exist, it's not Star Wars, never was and never will.

I think you're having too much fun being a contrarian, we basically agree that you can go out of the beaten path and be the protagonist of your history and not affect the canon with a semi competent GM at the helm. You're just enjoying to much arguing.

well, we are playing d6 fantasy, drawing from osric for advantages/disadvantages/special abilities, on Krynn, pre-cataclysm Taladas...for which I will be using the birthright map and birthright domain managment rules. So I reckon I might need a couple

This is why The Old Republic is the best time period for an actual Star Wars campaign. Big things happening and lots of Jedi, Sith, Mandalorians, smugglers and crime lords, super weapons, etc... but 3700 years before the films and with multiple choice on who's even in charge of the Republic/Empire after the "Commander" (who could be a Jedi, Sith, Republic trooper, smuggler, imperial agent, bounty hunter or Sith) kills the Sith Emperor.

So as long as you don't utterly destroy Coruscant, Naboo, Kamino, Geonosis, Mustafar, Tatooine, Alderaan, Yavin, Hoth, Bespin, Dagobah or Endor you're pretty much NOT violating any canon (3700 years is a LONG time for the setting to pick up any mess you leave behind... murder House Organa down to the last man and some distant relative will claim the lands/titles and change their name to Organa purely for the prestige and 150 generations later who is even going to remember?).

Bonus points for it still being attached to the old EU timeline/canon that it's incorporated everywhere it can and it's a huge sandbox of a galaxy to explore.

Quote from: jhkim on March 03, 2023, 02:09:52 AM

I'm trying to follow along, but I'm not sure what the core is for you. I agree that it's an "Alternate History" Star Wars if Luke isn't around. But I don't understand why it is not an "Alternate History" if James Bond isn't around. As I see it, any major change to the canon of the universe would mean that we're in an alternate history.

You imply that having mystic fate involved is a key to this. Luke is fated to defeat the Emperor, and Frodo is fated to defeat Sauron. So is this only an issue in universes with mystic fate? It seems to me a bigger feature is that while James Bond canon has a dozen or more mostly-unrelated storylines, Middle Earth is dominated by one storyline (Lord of the Rings) and Star Wars is arguably dominated by one storyline (the original trilogy).

Don't get hung up on fate.  That's just an example, though I do think that fate is part of what ties those two example in.  Yes, storyline is probably closer to what I mean.  Basically, the storyline takes overs the setting, which is a kind of domination, but a bit more than that. 

It's ironic for Middle Earth, since the languages came first, and then the setting as a place for the languages to live, and then the stories only after.  Which of all things should theoretically be a place where you could run a variety of stories with no issue.  Maybe I'm blind on that one, because I like the ME storyline too much to detach it.  I could run a ME game set after Aragon dies, but then I'm back to Geeky's point.  The Heroes have diminished and gone into the West at that point.  So the game I can find a way to run I don't want to, and the game that I'd want to run, is hampered by the weight of the existing story line.

Once you decide that the weight of the story line is too much, then you are moving firmly into "alternate history".  Once you go there, there's really nothing holding you back from changing more.  The prior setting becomes less useful.  In fact, it pretty rapidly can become just another source to mine for ideas.  Pretty soon, you are pulling from multiple settings, and synthesizing the different ideas, and coming up with your own things.  Somewhere along the way, you weren't running a licensed setting anymore. 

For me, once I cross the line into alternate history territory, all bets are off.   I've run Forgotten Realms exactly as S'mon said--cut off with no Time of Troubles.  Only, I think that really isn't a FR campaign in some ways--ways that I consider a feature, not a bug.  That campaign started out as FR, because it was 95% out of the books.  It didn't stay FR, because it was allowed to evolve and pull in inspiration from other sources.

I could also be biased because I think fidelity to the setting of a film or novel make for lousy campaigns, in general.  The GM and players may make it good despite the handicap, but sticking to that kind of canon is a big, needless deadweight on the campaign.  Tell me your going to run ME or Star Wars or Lyonesse or James Bond or anything like that straight, and I'm out.  Tell me you are running a mashup of ME, Lankhmar, Grimm's fairy tales, and Kingdom of Ys, then I'm interested.

Quote from: Bruwulf on March 02, 2023, 10:11:41 PMHow many people seriously buy a licensed setting to just retell the same story as in the movie they watched, or read in the book? I'm sure some, perhaps, but I seriously question if that's the majority.

You've just described why a lot of people don't bother to buy licensed RPGs. There's little point replaying the previous stories and there's little need for a licensed RPG if you are just going to do an alternate history version.

Anyone else remember this series of ads for the WotC Star Wars RPG?

(https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5436e153e4b0a4c7845c7e79/1415328871358-VXG777O0FCB5M829A40K/SW+ThisGuysStory.jpg?format=500w)

Nobody wants to be Stormtrooper number 14.

Does James Bond the movie series have a single recognisable canon? I got the impression it reset with each new actor. If you're GMing James Bond 007 as a solo RPG, just have the player play a new James Bond. Only reason not to use Bond is in a group game, so one PC does not overshadow the others.

I ran WEG D6 Star Wars, the PCs never felt overshadowed by Luke Skywalker. I think though these days I do prefer non-licensed settings.

Quote from: APN on March 02, 2023, 03:12:41 PM
TSR Marvel Superheroes was a great game back in the day (and the revised edition tweaks a few of the niggles). Well supported with stacks of supplements and adventures.

These days a licensed TTRPG is lucky to get half a dozen books/adventures because the suits that are in charge of handing the license out have unrealistic expectations. They see D&D numbers and expect millions to flow in.

When you look at the hugely successful licenced RPGs of the past, not only where they great games that you'd want to play even if not using the licensed setting, but, for the most part, they were the first big games in their genre. Call of Cthulhu was the first big horror game. Top Secret predated James Bond 007 but it was clunky. The sci-fi games before WEG's Star Wars were stodgy and overly complicated. The Marvel RPG had to supplant Champion but I'm no sure how popular Champions was back then (ant it was complicated as well. )

That's one reason why licensed games aren't as big a deal today as they used to be and end up fizzling out. There aren't many genres left that don't already have a decent RPG to cover them so the need for a new game is significantly less than in the 1980s.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on March 03, 2023, 08:39:55 AMOnce you decide that the weight of the story line is too much, then you are moving firmly into "alternate history".  Once you go there, there's really nothing holding you back from changing more.  The prior setting becomes less useful.  In fact, it pretty rapidly can become just another source to mine for ideas.  Pretty soon, you are pulling from multiple settings, and synthesizing the different ideas, and coming up with your own things.  Somewhere along the way, you weren't running a licensed setting anymore. 

Sure, but this is completely a valid way to use licensed settings.

As far as "nothing holding me back from changing more"... Yeah, but there's also nothing saying I have to. Maybe I just want to run Grey Box 'Realms.

That's where there seems to be a breakdown in understanding between two sides. "Once you have changed something, you might as well throw it all out and start from scratch" seems to be one side of the argument, and it just doesn't connect with me. That's almost literally "throwing the baby out with the bath water"... If RPGs were small humans and our bookcases were a bath tub, or something.

Okay, so not "almost literally", but you get the point.

Quote from: hedgehobbit on March 03, 2023, 08:41:11 AM
You've just described why a lot of people don't bother to buy licensed RPGs. There's little point replaying the previous stories and there's little need for a licensed RPG if you are just going to do an alternate history version.

Plenty of people clearly feel the need. At least, to the extent we *need* any of this hobby. Rather, say, they are strongly desired to the point where there is a market for them.

Again: Box of toys verses community theater. Licensed RPGs are boxes of toys. I can run them as close to the original story as I like, or just mine them for ideas, or any point in between.

Quote from: Bruwulf on March 03, 2023, 10:49:06 AMPlenty of people clearly feel the need. At least, to the extent we *need* any of this hobby. Rather, say, they are strongly desired to the point where there is a market for them.

There has to be some way to reconcile the fact that licensed games of today don't have the same impact that licensed games had in the 1980s and 1990s. Even mediocre licensed games of that era, like the first Star Trek and Dr. Who games, still had a huge amount of adventures and supplements published for them. Yet Fantasy Flight Game's recent Star Wars game got off to a great start but fizzled out to the point where the Asmodee just stopped publishing it.

If these types of games are strongly desired, why don't we see any of them sticking around like those old ones did?

I've already listed my reasons as:

1) There's no longer a need to buy an RPG supplement to use as a sourcebook
2) The RPG hobby has matured such that most genres already have multiple games to simulate them
3) Most movie and tv franchises are limited such that there is little room for a variety of adventures or are not open to adding in extra "heroes" to the story.

I will say that a licensed RPG is still a good way to introduce new players to the hobby but the product needs to be designed with this in mind. A starter set is good for this, a 300 page rulebook is not.

Quote from: hedgehobbit on March 03, 2023, 08:58:39 AM

When you look at the hugely successful licenced RPGs of the past, not only where they great games that you'd want to play even if not using the licensed setting, but, for the most part, they were the first big games in their genre. Call of Cthulhu was the first big horror game. Top Secret predated James Bond 007 but it was clunky. The sci-fi games before WEG's Star Wars were stodgy and overly complicated. The Marvel RPG had to supplant Champion but I'm no sure how popular Champions was back then (ant it was complicated as well. )

That's one reason why licensed games aren't as big a deal today as they used to be and end up fizzling out. There aren't many genres left that don't already have a decent RPG to cover them so the need for a new game is significantly less than in the 1980s.

There's a bit to unpack here.

I'll certainly agree, it's unlikely you're ever going to see a licensed RPG quite as monumental as D6 Star Wars or Call of Cthulhu. That's fair enough. And yes, I think the fact that they both got in pretty close to "on the ground floor" probably has a lot to do with it, but as you say, they were good games in their own right.

But I think we have to define "successful", here. As well to say the same thing about fantasy RPGs as long as Dungeons and Dragons is around... No game is ever going to have the success D&D does in the English speaking market. Even the long-running contenders - Rolemaster, Runequest, Harn, WFRP, etc - are basically just "also-rans" compared to the Mighty Dragon that is D&D.

But while there are plenty of licensed RPGs that are basically one-and-dones... Well, so too are there lots of *non* licensed RPGs that fare no better. And there are licensed RPGs that achieve a modicum of success, at least for a while. The Laundry Files had a decent run until Cubicle 7 lost the license for the system from Chaosium. Middle Earth has had a couple of reasonably successful RPGs - MERP, then The One Ring. I don't know if the 5E take has had any success, I don't partake of the fifth edition. My impression was that the WotC D20 Star Wars game was moderately successful. Conan has had at least two pretty successful RPGs.

But I think there's a more a couple other things.

One is a more unifying issue here than licensed verses original properties, and you kind of hit on it. It's very hard for a new game to break into the ranks of "successful RPG", rather than "flash-in-the-pan".

And unfortunately, a lot of licensed RPGs - because big name IP holders aren't likely to license properties to random yahoos these days - are basically done as cash grabs by bigger companies who don't ultimately care if they make a game that succeeds long term, so long as they get a good RoI for a while. So quite a lot of the time they get bolted to some existing system - D20, AGE, FATE, Cypher, etc. Sometimes those systems are a good fit, other times it's like trying to do a heart transplant when all you have is a lung. From a chicken.

Then other times, you get games where they try to stand out by being *too* unique, *too* different, and in the end chase away potential audience because they fail as even being a box of toys - it's not a box of toys, it's a big fancy playset, but you can't really do much with it other than poke at it and run your action figures around it. If I might be allowed to keep inventing and torturing metaphors. Mouseguard, as I mentioned earlier, kind of falls into this trap, but there have been others.

I dunno. I'll shut up for a bit, I'm rambling. Just got thoughts in my brainbox and I'm trying to get them out in some sort of semi-coherent fashion.

*edit*

Quote from: hedgehobbit on March 03, 2023, 11:14:05 AM
If these types of games are strongly desired, why don't we see any of them sticking around like those old ones did?

You posted while I was writing my last reply, but I sort of addressed this, or at least I threw some disjointed thoughts about the subject out.

Bruwulf,

That's all fair, as far as it goes.  I just go another step.  The odds against any new game being the best game it can be and breaking through the noise are astronomical.  A license, for multiple reasons, stacks the odds even more.  In return, the license maybe generates some interest, which the authors must find a way to leverage, to make up for the giant thumb on the scale.

For me, history shows that it is usually a net negative.  The exceptions for when it wasn't stick out as exceptions.  I'd feel the same way about any number of tacks that can be taken in a game, having nothing to do with licenses, too.  So I'm not saying that today a licensed game cannot both succeed and be a quality product.  If one did, I've be surprised but not shocked.  I'm just not holding my breathe. :D

Quote from: S'mon on March 03, 2023, 08:44:57 AM
Does James Bond the movie series have a single recognisable canon? I got the impression it reset with each new actor. If you're GMing James Bond 007 as a solo RPG, just have the player play a new James Bond. Only reason not to use Bond is in a group game, so one PC does not overshadow the others.

The Daniel Craig films were a reboot (despite keeping the same actress for M). The other Bonds form a continuity from Connery to Brosnan. Quite how he was so young in the 21st century when he was solving missions in the early '60s isn't explained.

At the time that RPG came out, there was only one film Bond, and most of the published missions were based on the films, so it was definitely playing loose with the canon, especially since the adventures intentionally deviate from the movies. As I recall, the game suggests having Bond pop-up if the players do badly in the mission, so that he can save the day and prevent doomsday. So the game itself certainly appears to be suggesting a break from the single film canon that existed at the time.

Quote from: Krazz on March 03, 2023, 01:10:31 PM

Quote from: S'mon on March 03, 2023, 08:44:57 AM
Does James Bond the movie series have a single recognisable canon? I got the impression it reset with each new actor. If you're GMing James Bond 007 as a solo RPG, just have the player play a new James Bond. Only reason not to use Bond is in a group game, so one PC does not overshadow the others.

The Daniel Craig films were a reboot (despite keeping the same actress for M). The other Bonds form a continuity from Connery to Brosnan. Quite how he was so young in the 21st century when he was solving missions in the early '60s isn't explained.

At the time that RPG came out, there was only one film Bond, and most of the published missions were based on the films, so it was definitely playing loose with the canon, especially since the adventures intentionally deviate from the movies. As I recall, the game suggests having Bond pop-up if the players do badly in the mission, so that he can save the day and prevent doomsday. So the game itself certainly appears to be suggesting a break from the single film canon that existed at the time.

Thanks, Krazz. I agree. In my last JB007 campaign, I thought the idea of "Bond saves the day" was a terrible suggestion in the game that makes the PCs seem very much lesser and Bond omnipotent. It very much exemplifies the complaint that makes the PCs into lesser heroes rather than THE HERO.

GeekyBugle suggested that Bond should just be working other cases -- but as you note, the Bond adventures often involve world-shaking catastrophe, like destroying Fort Knox with a nuclear bomb. If the world is at stake and Bond was active, one would expect that Bond would be involved - at least overlapping with the PCs.

-----

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on March 03, 2023, 08:39:55 AM

Quote from: jhkim on March 03, 2023, 02:09:52 AM
It seems to me a bigger feature is that while James Bond canon has a dozen or more mostly-unrelated storylines, Middle Earth is dominated by one storyline (Lord of the Rings) and Star Wars is arguably dominated by one storyline (the original trilogy).

Basically, the storyline takes overs the setting, which is a kind of domination, but a bit more than that. 

It's ironic for Middle Earth, since the languages came first, and then the setting as a place for the languages to live, and then the stories only after.  Which of all things should theoretically be a place where you could run a variety of stories with no issue.  Maybe I'm blind on that one, because I like the ME storyline too much to detach it.  I could run a ME game set after Aragon dies, but then I'm back to Geeky's point.  The Heroes have diminished and gone into the West at that point.  So the game I can find a way to run I don't want to, and the game that I'd want to run, is hampered by the weight of the existing story line.

That's my bolding above which seems to me to be the key. I can in principle understand that having emotional attachment to the existing storyline could mean that one can't enjoy an alternate history where the storyline is different. So it's about attachment to the original storyline. My fiancee has a similar problem with covers and mashups of songs she likes. For her, she's often very attached to the song the way she learned it, and can't enjoy a cover or alternate version even if she admits that the cover is skillfully done by a band she likes.

I often love alternate versions, maybe because I detach a little more and can enjoy multiple versions of the same song -- and similarly alternate histories of fiction. I'm trying to think of storylines where I'm so attached that I couldn't enjoy an alternate history of it, but I can't think of an example. Still, I can at least in theory understand that principle in others.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on March 03, 2023, 08:39:55 AM
I could also be biased because I think fidelity to the setting of a film or novel make for lousy campaigns, in general.  The GM and players may make it good despite the handicap, but sticking to that kind of canon is a big, needless deadweight on the campaign.  Tell me your going to run ME or Star Wars or Lyonesse or James Bond or anything like that straight, and I'm out.  Tell me you are running a mashup of ME, Lankhmar, Grimm's fairy tales, and Kingdom of Ys, then I'm interested.

I don't find that canon is a deadweight as long as the GM and players are on board with it being an alternate history. Just like historical gaming would be crippled if the players couldn't do anything to change history.

For me, the top thing that I like about using an adapted setting is that the players can instantly know what the world is like and what their characters would know. To get that same background knowledge of an original world, the GM has to give hours-long narration or multi-page writeups. Mashups aren't much better, since there are a thousand questions about how those different pieces fit together. What's the geography like? If I'm a Newhon ghoul, what are relations like with the sylvan elves? etc.

Being able to jump over the background means that we can get right into what I usually find is the more interesting stuff -- the PCs and their adventures.

Quote from: jhkim on March 05, 2023, 12:00:50 AM
For me, the top thing that I like about using an adapted setting is that the players can instantly know what the world is like and what their characters would know. To get that same background knowledge of an original world, the GM has to give hours-long narration or multi-page writeups. Mashups aren't much better, since there are a thousand questions about how those different pieces fit together. What's the geography like? If I'm a Newhon ghoul, what are relations like with the sylvan elves? etc.

Being able to jump over the background means that we can get right into what I usually find is the more interesting stuff -- the PCs and their adventures.

That's a place where your feature is my bug.  Because I'm focused on develop in play.  I don't want huge backgrounds from the players.  I don't want to give them all that narration or written background (though I do provide a little).  Background assumptions brought in from the license are just as bad or worse, because now I need to work to get those assumptions out.  Plus, almost everyone I run games for appreciates uncovering mysteries and secrets of the game world, with several different reasons why. 

The players learn what the world is like by playing in it, which is by far my preferred style.

Though the conversation has been helpful, because it has resolved something that I knew by experience and intuition but hadn't fully thought to its logical conclusion:  I don't like licensed material because it is (too long) background information written by someone not even in the campaign. :D

I have generally have lower expectations of licensed games based on my video game experience.  Licensed video games are generally of much lower quality than unlicensed ones because such a large part of their budget goes to licensing.  I avoid them for that reason.  The upsides are playing in that setting I always wanted to, less work for everyone getting up to speed on the setting, and new information or stories about a franchise I'm craving more of.  I was really excited to find GURPS Witch World for that last reason.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on March 05, 2023, 08:13:37 AM

Quote from: jhkim on March 05, 2023, 12:00:50 AM
For me, the top thing that I like about using an adapted setting is that the players can instantly know what the world is like and what their characters would know. To get that same background knowledge of an original world, the GM has to give hours-long narration or multi-page writeups. Mashups aren't much better, since there are a thousand questions about how those different pieces fit together. What's the geography like? If I'm a Newhon ghoul, what are relations like with the sylvan elves? etc.

Being able to jump over the background means that we can get right into what I usually find is the more interesting stuff -- the PCs and their adventures.

That's a place where your feature is my bug.  Because I'm focused on develop in play.  I don't want huge backgrounds from the players.  I don't want to give them all that narration or written background (though I do provide a little).  Background assumptions brought in from the license are just as bad or worse, because now I need to work to get those assumptions out.  Plus, almost everyone I run games for appreciates uncovering mysteries and secrets of the game world, with several different reasons why. 

The players learn what the world is like by playing in it, which is by far my preferred style.

I'm fine that we have different tastes, but I'm also concerned that we might be talking past each other. I also want the focus to be on uncovering mysteries and secrets in the game world. The stuff I want to skip past are things like "how does money work", "what religion do most people believe", "what sort of plants and animals would my character know about", etc. -- i.e. things that a character who grew up in the world and became a trained professional would know.

I often have games set in some version of the real world (modern or historical), which helps with this.

I typically want the PCs to feel like they are competent professionals who grew up in the game-world. I sometimes have run a game where the PCs are unwittingly transported into an alien environment that they know nothing about, like the children in the Chronicles of Narnia -- but that's not typical. My concern with running a game where everything is unknown to the players is that the PCs come across like the latter -- i.e. unwitting newcomers to their own world.

---

To the extent that the license means that the players already pre-know secrets, I regard that as a flaw that I want to mitigate. The most common one that I've had is in Call of Cthulhu where players know what many Mythos creatures are like. In my CoC games, I've usually focused on unique creations for the game-world, not on standard Mythos monsters. Alternately, the monster is revealed early and the focus is on what the creatures are up to rather than what they are.