I also agree with the style guidelines listed - great start! And Westerness has a great point: "rating" is still very subjective, and the US (presumably the biggest market) is quite prudish compared to many other first world countries. I think many have already said this but it's worth repeating: it's probably easiest to start with a slightly more prudish standard to push the broad-based appeal, and open up more risqué materials for those who want it. That seems to be the standard...
View full commentI also agree with the style guidelines listed - great start!
And Westerness has a great point: "rating" is still very subjective, and the US (presumably the biggest market) is quite prudish compared to many other first world countries. I think many have already said this but it's worth repeating: it's probably easiest to start with a slightly more prudish standard to push the broad-based appeal, and open up more risqué materials for those who want it. That seems to be the standard marketing approach, anyway: the trick is to make sure you don't make it too boring/sanitized or quash too much creative output.
This list sounds perfect. As far as the survey, I'm not sure which level to pick, but I'd like to see definite hints of "sexy" in D&D artwork. Cover most of the bum and bust (is that armor realistic), but you can definitely allude to them (and everything else is fair game). Give equal "sexy" treatment to males. Remember Hennet from 3.5? There's nothing wrong with some male chest. Focus on very expressive facial expressions. Accentuating the eyes also usually has good effect. In a fight...
View full commentThis list sounds perfect. As far as the survey, I'm not sure which level to pick, but I'd like to see definite hints of "sexy" in D&D artwork. Cover most of the bum and bust (is that armor realistic), but you can definitely allude to them (and everything else is fair game). Give equal "sexy" treatment to males. Remember Hennet from 3.5? There's nothing wrong with some male chest. Focus on very expressive facial expressions. Accentuating the eyes also usually has good effect. In a fight scene, don't be afraid of dirt on faces, messed up hair, even a little wounding (bruises, small amount of bleeding) etc. As far as being more creative with the "sexy" (clothes ripped off, people tied up, women pinning men down...), I want depictions to be true to context (would a battle or cult or woman warrior do that - then do it), but don't go so far that I'd be afraid of opening a book around pubescent children.
Also, consider how sexy non-traditionally sexy people can be? Something kind of fun that I incorporate into games and stories is the idea that a larger person, an amputee, a person with scars or a deformity (etc) can find himself/herself sexy or be paired with someone who finds them sexy. Through that perception, they can become as sexy as a more traditionally sexy character. It's about attitude (often expressed in the face/eyes/body posture).
Finally, in 3.5, some friends and I really wanted to see artwork that depicted adventurers on a good day. Why couldn't the adventurer's (of all sexes) go shopping and not get jumped just one time. Why not show some bro's helping each other don some armor? Why not show a nice campfire scene? Why not show an obvious romantic context (not a bedroom, but maybe 2 adventures look at each other for a few seconds too long)? Most scenes should be battle, but one or two vignettes of daily life could be fun too (& not just all of them at a bar or Mialee messing up a spell).
I agree with some observations. One thing that frustrated me to no end in 4ed was that players looked up to "Skills" section of their character sheets as some kind of choice menu. Considering that skill system is mostly used out of combat, in roleplaying situations - it felt like it was overly restricting. Furthermore, penalizing party for failures created a situation where players would pass on interesting ideas because their characters are unlikely to make the roll. I also didn't...
View full commentI agree with some observations. One thing that frustrated me to no end in 4ed was that players looked up to "Skills" section of their character sheets as some kind of choice menu.
Considering that skill system is mostly used out of combat, in roleplaying situations - it felt like it was overly restricting. Furthermore, penalizing party for failures created a situation where players would pass on interesting ideas because their characters are unlikely to make the roll.
I also didn't quite like the way the skills were always tied to the same ability score. I liked World of Darkness system idea of combining skills with different abilities depending on the action performed. Think the episode in Terminator 2 when the machine cuts open his arm to remove the skin - that would be great example of Intimidate (CON) roll. Or scaring someone by punching a hole in a wall beside his head would be Intimidate (STR).
I think that ability checks could work for all 'skill' checks. But there are two things missing from that basic approach. The first is that some skills really do require learning and, secondly, people can get better with practice. But I think it's a very simple prospect to address both while still retaining the same mechanic. First is to have a small list of skills that require training (acrobatics, swimming, etc.). There would have to be a mechanic for limiting the number and types....
View full commentI think that ability checks could work for all 'skill' checks. But there are two things missing from that basic approach. The first is that some skills really do require learning and, secondly, people can get better with practice.
But I think it's a very simple prospect to address both while still retaining the same mechanic.
First is to have a small list of skills that require training (acrobatics, swimming, etc.). There would have to be a mechanic for limiting the number and types. It could be similar to any of the older systems, or like feats.
Second, the modifier would be the ability score modifier plus 1/2 the character's level or something similar. Yes, that means that somebody picking up the skill at 10th level would be as proficient as somebody who learned it at 1st level and is now 10th level. But for simplicity (and you could argue that a 10th level character could learn faster and more easily), this mechanic would work well.
Combining a question from another post, I do think that a 'skill feat' should be separate from choosing a 'combat feat'.
Although players in my campaigns learned that I don't always play to their strengths, and the environment is a powerful ally or enemy so they tended not to min/max on just combat abilities.
The digital format has the severe disadvantage of not being collectible. I've had a Dragon Subscription for almost twenty years... and used to go to the game store and look for older magazines that had articles of interest to me. Look at what Dragon 1, 100, 200 go for.... never will Dragon 400 generate that or even generate that much interest. I recall when I first subscribed to Dragon, eagerly awaiting the arrival of my magazine and reading it cover to cover... then came the WoTC buy out...
View full commentThe digital format has the severe disadvantage of not being collectible. I've had a Dragon Subscription for almost twenty years... and used to go to the game store and look for older magazines that had articles of interest to me.
Look at what Dragon 1, 100, 200 go for.... never will Dragon 400 generate that or even generate that much interest. I recall when I first subscribed to Dragon, eagerly awaiting the arrival of my magazine and reading it cover to cover... then came the WoTC buy out and content fell in quality for a few years... it did eventually pick back up but never to the level where I was eagerly awaiting the magazine and reading every article in under a week...
Then came your digital age... now, I never know when an article is actually coming out, the magazine feels half the size and quality that it was... and now... not even an actual magazine, but just a loose leaf collection of articles that maybe have the same theme.
I'm sorry, but... it is not the same. This is not a magazine anymore, it isn't even a digital magazine... yes, there is potential in the digital medium, but I loathe the fact that I have to download individual articles... and I can't even download all of the content that is "published" for the magazine...
Go find some of the old magazines from the TSR hey day, look at the gorgeous cover art (say Dragon 114) and all of the articles.
With the digital format you have the ability to exploit the rise of the tablet and e-readers, but... not in the format you are currently in. I don't want to clutter my e-reader with a few pdf files per issue, I would prefer a single pdf file.
I like the format now but sorely miss the excitement of buying a copy of Dragon or Dungeon at the local hobby shop or book store. Things like the iPad has made this pretty nice though. I have been a opposed to E-readers but it's like clutching to albums when itunes is faster, we are all about needing it now, needing it faster. An annual would be nice, maybe broken into parts? An adventures annual, an annual on PCs, ect..
And Westerness has a great point: "rating" is still very subjective, and the US (presumably the biggest market) is quite prudish compared to many other first world countries. I think many have already said this but it's worth repeating: it's probably easiest to start with a slightly more prudish standard to push the broad-based appeal, and open up more risqué materials for those who want it. That seems to be the standard...
View full comment
View full comment