|
8 months ago ::
Oct 05, 2012 - 7:45PM
#11
|
Date Joined:
Dec 12, 2009
|
While I did enjoy the 3.5 BoVD (far more then the 4E version) for the rules it had that i wouldn't have thought to introduce into my game otherwise I would never say the entire DnD line needs to go the direction your suggesting. Sure, let their be some books that offer "official" drugs of the DnD world, rules for sadism, masichism etc etc. Yes its easy enough to figure such things out for ourselves, its what i did for 4E when necessary. But If you have books like the 3.5 and 4E line it is alot easier to add in the "dark" and "mature" (i use that term loosely) into a game then it is to remove such prevalent themes as having demons eating babies and devils raping mortals on every cover.
Now i won't go so far as some to say that the elements that make Spartacus, Song of Fire and Ice, and other similiar shows popular wouldn't help in any way shape or form, but i agree that making such elements the focus of DnD would, in fact, hurt the brand. Everything in moderation.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 05, 2012 - 7:59PM
#12
|
Date Joined:
May 24, 2012
|
I have nothing to add to this discussion other than to point out that it's a Song of Ice and Fire. Come on, people. 
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 05, 2012 - 8:07PM
#13
|
Date Joined:
May 25, 2012
|
"I guess the shoddy hackwork is the reason these shows sweep the emmys every year and win almost every major award for television exellence,sorry your arguement is not holding water."
No, they sweep the awards for the same reason the New York Times created a new subcategory of bestseller for children's works: because if they didn't exclude children's works, they might not be able to compete with them. The dominance of children's media, particularly in books, is unquestionable.
The hobby was never "evil." Some games and some gamers were, no doubt, but not D&D as a whole. And that's a good thing. If you want to play Fatal, it's elsewhere.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 05, 2012 - 8:11PM
#14
|
Date Joined:
May 24, 2012
|
OK I lied. I will be serious for a second just to say this:
Writing a D&D book "for mature readers" is much like playing an evil character in a D&D campaign. When done well, it can be fantastic and add a lot to the game (see The Complete Book of Necromancers). Sadly, most often, it is done badly - as an excuse to be controversial for the sake of controversy.
In other words, write a good book first. Don't let the need for a "for mature readers" label stop it from being published. But don't print up your "for mature readers" label first and then write a book to stick it on.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 05, 2012 - 9:15PM
#15
|
Date Joined:
Jan 17, 2012
|
actually found my own info on wiki under reception... en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Vile_Darkn...Ken Gustafson of Silven Publishing authored a positive outlook. "Overall," Gustafson wrote in August 2003, "Book of Vile Darkness is quite possibly the best supplement that Wizards of the Coast has put out in recent memory."[11] Much of the content and concepts of Book of Vile Darkness have since been reprinted or adapted in source books without the "Mature Audiences Only" label. Rules for drug use had in fact already been printed,[12] while later material included corrupt spells,[13] vile feats,[13] possession,[14] and detailed discussions of demon lords.
Hmmm... so it seems that books containing "adult" subject matter not only sell well... they can out sell everything else...
knock knock knock... hello dev's, are you hearing this?
@professor, if you think the dora the explora rpg would be a great seller, go for it, but personally not a show I wanna watch, not a game I wanna play.
"The secret we should never let the gamemasters know is that they don't need any rules." Gygax
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 05, 2012 - 9:30PM
#16
|
Date Joined:
May 25, 2012
|
Nobody is suggesting that D&D has to be toned down to the toddler level. But making supplements which require black plastic covers and a driver's license is going to make it harder to market the game as a whole to the broad audience it needs to succeed.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 05, 2012 - 10:15PM
#17
|
Date Joined:
Mar 31, 2012
|
Because a wikipedia article says it. it must be so! Nay, Because a quote from the critical reception section of a wikipedia article says it, it must be so!
Seriously, the Book of Vile Darkness is a novelty. It's not an important thing R&D should be focusing on. Especially as an early release. Anyone who wants to run a more "mature" game can, without that book's help (and I put mature in quotes, because if you think that adding gratuitous sex and gore and drug use, and all the other "goodies" that the Book of Vile Darkness provides, you probably don't have a firm grasp on what maturity really is). However there are plenty of things that the developers should be focusing on, and this is not one of them, in fact I can do a list of all the things that come before it in priority, and I'll still have probably left stuff out
Core rulebooks (Including not only the basic core rules, but the various different modules that they promised us from the get-go)
Advanced Rules Modules (because you know they're going to make books for these; you're deluding yourself if you think all the modules will be in the core rulebooks)
At least one Iconic campaign setting
Several non-iconic campiagn settings
Advanced non-module books (complete X a la 3.x, X Power a la 4e, PHB II, ect)
More Monster Manuals
Prepublished Adventures
Campaign setting guides (Manual of the planes, cityscape, Book of the underdark, ect)
Equipment guide
That's a ton of things to get to before you get close to focusing on stuff like "The Book of Vile Darkness."
I am currently raising funds to run for President in 2016. Too many administrations have overlooked the international menace, that is Carmen Sandiego. I shall devote any and all necessary military resources to bring her to justice.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 05, 2012 - 10:29PM
#18
|
|
|
I like my games dark and/or mature, and the most fun I've ever had in D&D was playing evil characters. With that in mind, I'd love to see the evil option get quality support. That's not to say that we need a whole lot of mechanically evil options, though there should be some.
There are a few things that a quality "evil option" book needs to focus on.
1) Evil alignments. The book needs to clarify the difference between evil and omnicidal.
2) Evil groups. How to assemble, maintain, and motivated groups of evil-aligned characters. How to choose adversaries for evil groups.
3) Evil societies (or evil institutions, like slavery, in non-evil societies). How do evil societies work? What holds them together? Why do non-evil societies tolerate evil institutions? etc.
4) Ritual sacrifice. This is one of the rare mechanical elements. Evil magic is about blood, and bone, offering human (often virgin) sacrifices.
Why Mechanics-Alignment Integration is Bad
Show
so why even play a fighter if you can play the paladin the exact same way behaviorally and get added power to boot. "Paladin" is about accepting better game-enhancing mechanics at the price of more rigid in game behavior.
Really? So it goes something like this?
Fighter: "I want to be a paladin."
NPC: "Really?"
Fighter: "Yes."
NPC: "Very well." Starts reading from a holy book while still in-character "Do you accept having to choose and stick to the lawful good alignment, eventhough neither of us actually knows that it exists or what it is?"
Fighter: "I do."
NPC: "Do you reject good game balance because you accidentally rolled a high Charisma?"
Fighter: "What?"
NPC: "I don't know what it means either."
Fighter: "Oh. Umm, ok I do."
NPC: "In the name of all that is metagamey and broken, accept these better game enhancing mechanics."
Fighter: "These what?"
NPC: "Just get out there and try to fulfill a million different people's notion of good while not violating and part of any of them."
So the system is designed such that every single hit needs to be described to avoid confusion? Here's a scenario. The players are nudists, everybody in the world are nudists, it's not weird, it's totally normal in this land. They are naked and they fight drakes taking damage throughout, but healing up with surges. Later they meet the guy who raised the drakes.
Part 1: I didn't describe any of the hits. What does he see?
Part 2: Lets say I described the drakes as biting the players, yet they healed up. What does he see?
D20 Modern Toon PC Race.
Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 05, 2012 - 10:31PM
#19
|
Date Joined:
May 25, 2012
|
Actually, the wikipedia article doesn't even say that. The review quoted by Baalbmoth ifs from a vanity press self publishing operation. It says not one word about sales. Apparently he's simply making that part up.
What it *does* mention, at length, is the ugly controversy which surrounded Vile Darkness' publishing, including the apology eventually issued by Paizo for printing excerpts.
This idea is just getting worse and worse, isn't it?
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 05, 2012 - 10:40PM
#20
|
|
|
Nobody is suggesting that D&D has to be toned down to the toddler level. But making supplements which require black plastic covers and a driver's license is going to make it harder to market the game as a whole to the broad audience it needs to succeed.
As long it's it's supplements (and by that I mean a limited set of supplements) and not material in the required books, I don't really see the impact on the overall audience the game can target.
Why Mechanics-Alignment Integration is Bad
Show
so why even play a fighter if you can play the paladin the exact same way behaviorally and get added power to boot. "Paladin" is about accepting better game-enhancing mechanics at the price of more rigid in game behavior.
Really? So it goes something like this?
Fighter: "I want to be a paladin."
NPC: "Really?"
Fighter: "Yes."
NPC: "Very well." Starts reading from a holy book while still in-character "Do you accept having to choose and stick to the lawful good alignment, eventhough neither of us actually knows that it exists or what it is?"
Fighter: "I do."
NPC: "Do you reject good game balance because you accidentally rolled a high Charisma?"
Fighter: "What?"
NPC: "I don't know what it means either."
Fighter: "Oh. Umm, ok I do."
NPC: "In the name of all that is metagamey and broken, accept these better game enhancing mechanics."
Fighter: "These what?"
NPC: "Just get out there and try to fulfill a million different people's notion of good while not violating and part of any of them."
So the system is designed such that every single hit needs to be described to avoid confusion? Here's a scenario. The players are nudists, everybody in the world are nudists, it's not weird, it's totally normal in this land. They are naked and they fight drakes taking damage throughout, but healing up with surges. Later they meet the guy who raised the drakes.
Part 1: I didn't describe any of the hits. What does he see?
Part 2: Lets say I described the drakes as biting the players, yet they healed up. What does he see?
D20 Modern Toon PC Race.
Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.
|
|
|
