New medieval roleplaying game to hit market and need opinion

[greedo1379]

...
     BUT I WILL NOT EVER GIVE IN TO THE NOTION THAT 3E IS THE END OF FANTASY GAMING, AND THERE WILL BE NO BETTER.
      What slips through the cracks are the little things. for instance, if 3E was such a monster, money maker, yada yada, why did TSR go so bad? Wizards had it, then to hasbro through buyout. Why also the flood in market of d20?. simple. 3E will simply not be in the near future?
      CRAZY YOU SAY? THINK ME MAD????
  Hasbro has bought them, will milk them, and will shuck that game off like a used condom as soon as the market dries up. And ohh yes it will dry. here's why;
      You valamir, have product A. You just bought product A from a business. This product is unique, with thousands and thousands of buyers hanging on just to buy more. Your next move is too, what??
 duplicate product A into many more different product As,  until the market is so flooded that there is nothing else to buy?
not any business company I have ever seen(how many new coke products STAY on the market?).
       Your 800 lb gorilla has diabetes and there is just a little insulin left.
  I may have ranted a little, and do apologize, but this is just my take.
      thanks for the input
              kevin"Ice water" presley
              (kinda catchy, thanks)

No, there will certainly be better (and certainly *are* better) systems out there.  But why should I wade through all the crap when I am perfectly content with D&D3E?  It does everything I want a system to (or at least it can with a little modification).

If I want to add a little twist I can pick up any of the D20 supplements and be off and running with only a skimming of the new book.  I don't need to sit down and pore over it to figure out how it works.

Do I want to let my spellcasters carry broadswords?  OK... wait for it... done!  In my campaign all characters will select 4 different weapons to be proficient in.  Done.  And I did it in D&D3E.  This is just a house rule.

There's a flood in the market of D20 stuff because its so easy to do.  I don't need to sit down and pound out some lame system (not that your's is lame of course).  I just write a story or imagine a cool setting and in an afternoon scribble some statistics on it and hit the "print pdf" button.

D20 and the OGL isn't going anywhere for a long long time.

Now I don't agree with everything I wrote above but you can bet a fair number of people do.  (I actually prefer West End Games D6 system and use it for just about everything but its the same basic idea)

[Bankuei]

Hi Kevin,

I'm also glad to see your level of enthusiasm is not dampered.  

No one here is claiming that D&D is the "best" or "end all be all".  What we are talking about is brand name marketing and trying to compete with that.  The truth is, if you make a game that's "like enough" to another established game, folks will simply buy and play the one that they are familar with.  

By no means does this mean that you have no place for your game.  The Riddle of Steel and Burning Wheel are both doing well as independent fantasy games, but they make their success on being fundamentally different than D&D.  In this way, they are able to carve their own territory and have several dedicated fans who keep them alive and growing in both play and sales.

How is it that these games can thrive?  What is it that took down TSR?  Business practices, plain and simple.  And part of good business practice is, "You don't sell the same thing as Brand X, unless you can make it better, cheaper, and market it better."

All that aside, you should focus on your product first and foremost.  Research, revise, playtest, revise, take your enthusiasm and demand the best of your game that you can make it.  After that, then worry about what other folks are doing, business-wise.

Chris

[kevin_presley]

To Bankuei,
   Thanks for your continued input first off. People may get tired of reading that line, but I do respect everyone's opinion from the forge.
  That being said;
     The last post that I wrote does sound a little like I may be fixated on 3e. My mindset on that is simple. Right now, that is simply the best game, highest quality product on the market. In order for us(or anyone else) to survive and have the success that the D&D games have enjoyed, we are going to have to stop looking at that game like it is mt. fuji, an unreachable summit.
       I will not be posting anything more on the subject of 3E(unless provoked). I just wanted everyone to know that I am not a lunatic ranting about the demise of D&D. It is just one of my priorities to be as good as, if not better(ONE DAY).
        BEFORE ANYONE ELSE SAYS IT, YEAH I GOT A LONG HAUL,
         BUT SO WHAT, I'M YOUNG WITH TIME ON MY HANDS!!!!
Kevin"cold water" presley

[kevin_presley]

Hello!

     You made some valid points in your post, some of which I had never thought through until you had made them. I may have been a bit rash in my post, but sometimes we all steam a little(and sometimes it's not on the true subject that bothers us).
      We, by that I mean my partners and I, understand now that our first attempt needs some,(cough,cough) assistance. We may need to go back to the drawing board a little(or buy a new board). I just wanted to let you and everyone know that getting on to the forge has helped me more than you will know.
thanks,
kgp
(do you think I could at least try to WRASTLE the 800 lb gorilla?)

[Zoetrope10]

Valamir, you wrote:

There is a definite demand for Fantasy, faux-medieval RPG gaming. Its probably the biggest single niche in the hobby. But the problem is that its a niche that's already sewn up tight by the 800 pound gorilla of d20. There is NO WAY, you, me, anyone else on this forum is going to topple that gorilla. They have the an enormous marketing budget and an army of dedicated fans many of whom never even consider playing anything else but. Any attempt at out D&Ding D&D is guarenteed to be a commercial failure (even if it is a rocking fun game).

Surely the same could have been said of Google, in relation to AltaVista? And yet the once minnow knocked off the then 800-pound gorilla.

René

[Jasper]

The internet is a fickle thing, Rene, so I might be cautious in applying too much from it to the comparably traditional RPG market.  But the most telling thing about the power of brand loyalty and familiarity, with respect to D&D, is that despite TSR's collapse and subsequent purchase by WoTC, D&D is still a monolithic giant.  

D&D may some day topple...or more likely simply wane in importance.  I'm not holding my breath, but even if it does happen, none of us here are going to make it happen -- even a big rival like World of Darkness hasn't stopped people playing D&D.  No, if it's going to happen, it will be because consumers are sick of D&D.  There are already tons of interesting alternatives out there but most people don't play them.  So the issue isn't making something "better" than D&D, but waiting for a change in people's tastes, and doing your own small part to help speed that.  But it's going to be a slow process, and I can't imagine a single game storming the gates of WoTC's franchise -- at least not with any effect.  (So don't storm to no effect. Better, as Ralph pointed out, to carve out your own niche. )

[Andy Kitkowski]

My next comment is going to be very, very lame and I apologize in advance.

In order for us(or anyone else) to survive and have the success that the D&D games have enjoyed, we are going to have to stop looking at that game like it is mt. fuji, an unreachable summit.

Mt. Fuji's summit is not unreachable. I climbed it in under 6 hours.

Thanks!
-Andy

[greyorm]

BUT I WILL NOT EVER GIVE IN TO THE NOTION THAT 3E IS THE END OF FANTASY GAMING, AND THERE WILL BE NO BETTER.

No, there's tons of 'better' fantasy game products out there -- so why are you trying to compete with 3E by making...well, 3E? That's the troubling question. You're pitting D&D against a modified clone of the D&D rules, and I, for one, fail to see how that is making fantasy gaming about anything more than 3E?

That is, it seems like your goal is to try and take on the 800-lb gorilla. Ok, so you're going to try and supplant D&D with...itself? That's why folks are saying "it won't happen" -- the market is not going to give up D&D for something that's like D&D (ie: basically D&D with a funny hat).

So, yeah, head back to the drawing board: and to start that, let me ask you: what's the point of play? What would a good/typical session include, what sorts of things would happen in your ideal session?

[kevin_presley]

Mr. Andy,
That was kinda my point. fuji's summit can be reached. We need to stop looking at D&D like it is an unreachable summit, when it can be reached.
I was a little unclear in that post, but in my ranting and attacking of the gorilla, I wandered a little too far from it. The point I mean.
ok, well, seems like I have sparked a little bit of life in an old debate. Let me sum this up.


DO NOT KILL AN 800 LB GORILLA WITH DIABETES WHILE TRYING TO CLIMB THE CLIMBABLE UNREACHABLE SUMMIT WHILE WRASTLING A GOOGLE. P.S. DO NOT ATTEMPT TO STORM THE GATES WITH MR. FUJI AT THE DOOR.

(that pretty much says it all, don't you think?)
kevin

[Mike Holmes]

Kevin, check out this analogy.

D&D is McDonald's. It's not really good food, but people go there in droves anyhow.

Now, there are all sorts of games that in the analogy are like Burger King, Hardees, etc. They all do fine, but they aren't going to knock McDonald's off. These are other fantasy games like, say, Palladium, that compete for precisely the same market.

Then there's you. You are like a Mom and Pop stand selling burgers.

1. Your burgers are no better than those of Burger King. Go read Palladium, Rolemaster, and the myriad other games that go up against the giant. Is your game really better? If not, then why would your game to better than these others at offing the king?

2. There are games that in the analogy would be like that burger place on that you know about in town that has the best burger you've ever tasted. Much better than your burger. There is no question that the burger is better than McDonalds and they're becoming a chain (around here it's called Culvers). Does that mean that McDonalds will go away? Seriously, do you think that just putting out a superior product will make people change their eating habits?

You see, it's not that we think that D&D can't be brought down. We just don't think that you can do it with the game that you have given that it's not any better than other games that have tried, nor with the budget that you have. McDonalds and D&D both thrive on branding, and advertising. People play D&D in many cases, because they don't want to try anything else. Tell me, how are you going to change that? It's actually much harder to do than stop someone from eating at McDonald's.

Is it right? No. Does recognizing the problem of surmounting the obstacle mean that we've given up? No.

Yes, the companies owning D&D have gone under no less than three times. Bankrupt. This is because they had very little business sense, actually. Consider that any other product would not have been brought back in any other market. Why is D&D still here? Because people refuse to stop playing it. D&D went bankrupt despite the best sales of any RPG ever, and it's such a relatively good seller that it came back from the dead twice.

Does this help give you some perspective at all?

Mike

[sirogit]

D&D does not sell because of its quality.

It sells because of its perks: Its easy to find.

Basing game design on the D&D market is not productive, because the market is not about quality, its about perks. Those perks are now unavailable to anyone, because you can no longer get name recognition for being the first RPG, because there already has been a first RPG.

Basing game design on the D&D market will make the game very non-innovative, as features such as "mages that can wear armor and use weapons" is a default feature of nearly every rpg that isn't D&D. Its a pretty old hat and saturated part of the market. If that what you want your game to be, go ahead, but it would be in no way "Revoloutionary."

[DevP]

We, by that I mean my partners and I, understand now that our first attempt needs some,(cough,cough) assistance. We may need to go back to the drawing board a little(or buy a new board). I just wanted to let you and everyone know that getting on to the forge has helped me more than you will know.

Some of my best code comes from when I program some total crap the first go-round, and am forced to scrap it and totally re-architect - and the next version is almost golden.

So going back to the design issue: things that have been said have gotten some folks to consider purchasing a new drawing board. What sorts of stuff have been talked about? (If such discussions are ready to share...)

[LordSmerf]

Grr... one of these days i'll remember to check for more pages before i post...

Thomas

[kevin_presley]

I am seeing a common thread amoung all of the posts, for the most part. By that I mean, it looks like any given RPG market may only have one big, top dog(medievil fantasy=D&D). Oh yes, there can be others, but instead of having a few mega games, generally speaking, there can be only one.
  I see a lot more work in our little company's future, and at least one major overhaul. I wanted everyone to know that your opinions are very valuable to me. I get to hear the views of like-minded people who are neck deep in the world of RPGs.
  You have not seen nor heard the last of the KGP. I shall return for round 2 of RPG inventions class 101.
thank you for all of your time and posts
Kevin Presley
(do you think maybe I could at least kick the 800 lb gorilla in the knees?)

[Bankuei]

Hi kevin,

You're looking at a couple of different goals, and its important for discussion to be aware that these aren't necessarily rolled up into one ball:

1) Making a good game
2) Getting a solid fanbase who support you
3) Making profit
4) "beating" WOTC

The difference between the first 3 and the last one is a couple million dollars in marketing and 3 decades of brand name.  And, in fact, there's no need nor reason for you to even concern with #4 really.  It's not that the market can ONLY have one top dog, what it is, is that no one else has the money to out market them at this time.

As far as the first three goals, they are completely possible, and even reasonable, even if your funds only consist of time.  If you look over in the individual game forums, you'll see a wide variety of companies and games which fulfill the first three goals.  And the 3 are linked.  A good game keeps your fanbase, and your fanbase promotes your game, allowing you to make profit over the long run.

A key point to this is that your game has to actually be fundamentally different than anything else out there.  If it is "close enough" then folks will just default to the name they know.  As it stands now, many of the things you are claiming to innovate on, have already been done, and are not the optimal selling points of your game.  Again, research cannot hurt you, only help you better view the range of possibility, because it is quite large, some of which may show you better ways to do things, dead ends and pitfalls you may wish to avoid, and perhaps ways that you'd never use, but get you inspired on something completely new.

Until folks can see more of the system, no one can give you much more useful input.

Chris