Topic: Multiple Edition Idea

[Peter R]

My main campaign for the last 6 years has been RMC with the rules as written and almost no companions or house rules. My current PBP game has sections of the RMC rules replaced with the equivelant RMU rules.

My next game will be one of two. Either a HARP Fantasy/SF game or a RMU/Champions/Runequest mashup. The deciding factor will be just timing. I have the HARP rules I need now but if RMU is published first then I may go with that.

Setting-wise I will nto be using SW out of respect to my current GM but ICE also have Cyradon as a setting. It is not a huge leap double stat all of those materials for the new RMU and HARP as they already double stat SW for RMC/RMSS.

[gog]

A major point of that discussion seems to be that different D&D editions were written (to various degrees) to support different play styles. Is that true for RM? It seems to me that there are some really core fundamentals about RM that have been consistent between editions. Combat is dangerous in every edition. Characters are encouraged to develop core skills for their profession but able to diversify in every edition. Spell lists have had pretty much the same spells in every edition. Did RMSS change the experience point system significantly from RM2? If RM2 gave experience for treasure I suppose that rewards a certain play style.

I think along side this there is the fact that most RM editions can be mixed with not to much work, while for the D&D editions they have a much higher difference between the systems so can't be integrated at well

[bpowell]

bpowell - That's interesting to know. I think Nicholas said the problem was that everyone involved in GCP products, including him, is part-time/freelance. Not just authors, but graphics, layout, formatting and editing. So they have to do other things to pay the bills.

I am not faulting Nicholas or anyone else, was just stating a fact.  I have the modules and my notes sitting here waiting.  It was a mutual decision (or that is my take) to wait on trying to push them until RMU was settled.  Trust me, I can understand Real Life becoming an issue.  I have four children, help run a company, and am in the Naval reserve.  Life is interesting and we must all look to the future and push forward.  I am hold no one to "blame", unless it is myself.

-BP

[RandalThor]

Our group contains 3 GMs and we run two games concurrently so over a weekend everyone gets some time playing. So unless our GM is particularly OCD about his game setting then SW set up is not ideally suited to being the default setting.

For your group. I dare to say that most groups are not set up like this. And the other GM (the one asking you guys not to buy SW stuff) is missing a golden opportunity: misdirection without having to do much of anything but change a few names. Setting material, like the rules of a game, are optional. Changing a few things here and there to confuse the players is very easy to do.

If I was a better writer I would jump at the chance to write a Shadow World AP. To get payed, even a little bit, for something I enjoy doing is a feeling I have not felt yet in my life and I would like to.
 

[egdcltd]

bpowell - That's interesting to know. I think Nicholas said the problem was that everyone involved in GCP products, including him, is part-time/freelance. Not just authors, but graphics, layout, formatting and editing. So they have to do other things to pay the bills.

I am not faulting Nicholas or anyone else, was just stating a fact.  I have the modules and my notes sitting here waiting.  It was a mutual decision (or that is my take) to wait on trying to push them until RMU was settled.  Trust me, I can understand Real Life becoming an issue.  I have four children, help run a company, and am in the Naval reserve.  Life is interesting and we must all look to the future and push forward.  I am hold no one to "blame", unless it is myself.

-BP

I was more elaborating on my earlier comment about needing writers to include all the other types needed, and the difficulty that presented in managing to commit to a firm schedule, such as is seen in an Adventure Path. Waiting for RMU seems sensible for a number of reasons.

[egdcltd]

Our group contains 3 GMs and we run two games concurrently so over a weekend everyone gets some time playing. So unless our GM is particularly OCD about his game setting then SW set up is not ideally suited to being the default setting.

For your group. I dare to say that most groups are not set up like this. And the other GM (the one asking you guys not to buy SW stuff) is missing a golden opportunity: misdirection without having to do much of anything but change a few names. Setting material, like the rules of a game, are optional. Changing a few things here and there to confuse the players is very easy to do.

If I was a better writer I would jump at the chance to write a Shadow World AP. To get payed, even a little bit, for something I enjoy doing is a feeling I have not felt yet in my life and I would like to.
 

I would say that you don't know until you try. However, Adventure Paths are not written by one person,  but by many. A group of people here could team up to write one - or at least have a go. If it works, well and good. Quellbourne has been discussed in the forums before regarding this, and Gethaena would be another possibility. Both are owned, so modifying them is not a problem (as long as it's GCP who publish anything). Perhaps something could be developed from them that people would be interested in.

And yes, being paid for doing something you enjoy is great.

[bpowell]

bpowell - That's interesting to know. I think Nicholas said the problem was that everyone involved in GCP products, including him, is part-time/freelance. Not just authors, but graphics, layout, formatting and editing. So they have to do other things to pay the bills.

I am not faulting Nicholas or anyone else, was just stating a fact.  I have the modules and my notes sitting here waiting.  It was a mutual decision (or that is my take) to wait on trying to push them until RMU was settled.  Trust me, I can understand Real Life becoming an issue.  I have four children, help run a company, and am in the Naval reserve.  Life is interesting and we must all look to the future and push forward.  I am hold no one to "blame", unless it is myself.

-BP

I was more elaborating on my earlier comment about needing writers to include all the other types needed, and the difficulty that presented in managing to commit to a firm schedule, such as is seen in an Adventure Path. Waiting for RMU seems sensible for a number of reasons.

Actually I have the first module ready to go to the can, the second written and numbers 3 -8 outlined with NPCs, and a story arc completed.  I would not want to publish #1 until I had at least 1-6 done.  I could have that done in 2-3 months once RMU is finalized (or before it there was a call for it).

I have been told I can be focused (my wife calls it anal retentive) when it comes to my gaming.

-BP

[Witchking20k]

A sourcebook with a small ruleset and levels 1-3 would be fine IMO.  But, a very specific locale , like Quellebourne for example is what I'd recommend.....as it is already a popular choice.  Low-end adventures with high-end hooks.

[tbigness]

I would do levels 1-5 at Norek as this was one of the main cities for me and it is a great source of information.

[RandalThor]

I like the Quelbourne idea because that one can lead the characters to the bigger events in the world. Have the first AP go from 1-10, dealing with the last remnants of the Ice Krals, the Spider Goddess and her followers and perhaps a little Iron Wind plot in there (like keeping agents of the IW from reaching the lost city of Quelbourne and the magics they could find there - as well as the one responsible for the destruction of the city - to bend to their will) and finally capping it off with the PCs finding the city, dealing with the big-bad there and discovering the history and a link the bigger setting.

[Cory Magel]

I do not want to start a Jihad here.  As far as I am concerned I enjoyed all of the RM editions.  While I think I have most of my time playing n RMSS, I think I have the books from every version.

I would agree.  We didn't use RM1/RM2 as full on system (unless you want to count early MERP) but we did use it to revamp D&D with.  I've got everything from the first Arms Law through the most recent RMFRP stuff that wasn't just a republication of RMSS materials.  We use it all (obviously converting things over).

D&D 3rd Ed - When people were leaving Role Playing WotC decided to reboot the system.  They developed 3.0 and used elements from many different systems.  At the rollout convention here in Denver I looked at the head of the development team (Johnathan Tweet) when he could not explain why something was done and asked "What the source document?" (I handed him my hard backed copy of RMFRP).  I thought he was going to blow a gasket.  Truth hurts I guess. [For some reason I think Mr. Tweet thought I was a jerk...go figure :-)]

We were very familiar with both systems at the same time in the mid to late 90's (D&D and RM) and I would say the influence of RM on D&D started before 3.0.  Each revamp of D&D became a bit more like RM and while it's reasonable and totally justifiable to say all systems have an influence on each other and that similar ideas can develop independent of each other I don't think it can be completely dismissed. Take for example the fact that someone like Monty Cook came from RM and moved to D&D.  You just can't ignore that influence.  Note, I'm not saying there is anything wrong with that... but I wouldn't be shocked by the reaction you seem to feel you received.

Now, further editions were often seen as a money grab by Hasbro as the most amount of money is made on new versions of an RPG and the versions came out a bit too quickly.  But I suspect a big motivator was probably trying to appeal to MMORPG players.  Which I can understand, but I'm not sure that's really all that possible as a short term goal.  I honestly don't think Hasbro really understood the RPG market when they first took over WotC.  I think 5.0 is kind of correcting the ships course.

Regarding multiple editions.  That's hard.  I think existing RM users would be happier as a whole if you did that, that being dual stat'ed books and basically left RM2/C and RMSS/FRP in place.  But that's assuming existing RM customers are still the future of the system and I really don't think they are.  It also has the problem of there already being so much material out what could you create that's truly new?  I think it would just lead to sub-par RM2 support and a short lived RMSS support.  RM needs a new influx of customers.  The two biggest problems are RMs past reputation and trying to find a way to appeal to the modern gamer.  Will it still be a veterans game?  Should it try to simplify or stay detailed?  I don't think RMU committed to just one of those.  Intentional or not I think it has a foot on each path when it needs to choose one.  The biggest opportunity for RM to pull players in was during the D&D 3.5 and 4.0 window.  That was probably a comparable opportunity to the decline of TSR window.

Then there's the problem that ICE is, essentially, a decentralized company that is everyone's part time second job.  I don't fault anyone for that (well, I could point to previous incarnations of ICE, but we won't go there).  It's just the current reality.  That actually makes me ponder if the current goal of the ownership is to become a serious contender again or just keep the flame alive.  Both have their valid reasons.

[Witchking20k]

There's no IP in stats.  Leave them out of the books and offer them as additions: inserts with hard copies & secondary PDF files with digital downloads.