The new Marvel RPG, Or: Why Jared's Games Have a Shot Now :)

[Brand_Robins]

Shrug, man. They did the exact same thing in 1984 - the MSH back then was as innovative, if not more so, relative to all existing games at the time as this one is now. They were Marvel back then, too.

While the cynical, nagging side of me agrees with much of what you're saying, I do have to point out one small thing here. It may not make a difference, but it is something that could be foundational for differences --

Back then it wasn't Marvel. It was TSR. It didn't have a massive promotional/advertising force behind it trying to bring non-RPGers into RPGs, it was totally set on brining people who were both Marvel and RPG fans to a TSR game.

The thing that I am excited about isn't so much the game (it could suck) as the fact that someone outside, a mainstreamish publisher, is using a lot of advertising and a lot of clout to sell an RPG to people who might not normally play RPGs. Rather than going with the general theory, which a few game designers have publicly stated on other fora, that an RPG will not sell unless it does X (uses dice) and Y (has a certain "heaviness" to the rules) to audience Z (people who already play) they are trying something new.

They also are not targeting the general population at large, which probably would be doomed from the outset, they are targeting people who are already gamers – just not RPGers. The new Marvel game is going after CCGers and CRPGers with a vengeance. These are people that already have show a willingness to play games based around resource management/strategy/adventure and who might, under the right evil mind-control, become RPGers.

Will it work? I don't know. I have my doubts. But I hope it works. I want it to work. And I'm excited that a big company is at least trying it.

(Of course, if it flops it might keep anyone else from trying a similar break out move for years to come.)

[Brand_Robins]

[quote="Jonathan Walton there are a couple of signs ("One of his games even uses Tarot cards as a resolution mechanic" and the fact that they've never heard of Nobilis) that make me suspect that they're not as in touch with roleplaying's counter-culture as they'd like to believe.  Were they just asleep for Everway, Once Upon a Time, and Dust Devils?  How do you miss Nobilis when it's consistently getting 5/5 every week at RPGnet?  I'm going to be trying hard to keep my expectations low, since those 128 pages are likely to be filled with a whole host of traditional gaming gimmicks that will alienate potential cross-community purchases by comics fans.[/quote]

Believe you me, I had about the same reaction.  "Even uses tarot cards!" was a source a giggling on this end of the monitor. However, there are a few fairly interesting bits about the game that I'd like to explore more.

For example, an RPG.net poster tossed us the following bits:

* Flashback Panels, something I hadn't heard about before getting the article. They appear to work something like Confessionals from InSpeceteres- a character can, during a dramatic scene, take a moment for a 'flashback' to something suitibly dramatic in their history that would give them a reason to perform just a little better this time- without having had to detail this connection ahead of time.

•   The Experience system, which is recording 'Lines'- a brief mention of Something You Did during the adventure, and what ability you used to do it (Not every ability is open to being so noted). The GM gives you some number of Lines after each Mission. Ten lines associated with one thing = increase that thing's level by one. Meaning you'll advance fairly slowly, and not everything you have will be subject to improvement, and (Best of all), you'll be building a character background that you can look back and remember your previous adventures with.

I have to admit I like the sound of both of those bits, and the resource system sounds like it could be well done as well.

So while they are certainly not as cutting-edge super-cool counterculture-in-the-know as we are – I don't think it matters that much. Just because they don't walk in the same small circles that we do does not mean that they don't have good ideas outside the norm that are all their own.

[szilard]

On the 1980s MSH game:

In retrospect, yes, the game was innovative. Did anyone notice this at the time, though? I remember not really knowing what to make of Karma - I treated as somewhere between xp, alignment, and some kind of power pool. Other than that, the game was easily understood by most conventional gamers. Yes, stats had descriptors, but they also had numbers assigned to them. There was a big chart and some percentile dice. It seemed standard.

Was it subversive?

Not really. It couldn't be effectively subversive due to the gaming culture and lack of alternatives. Say you used MSH to run a Narrativism-heavy game. Could you then transition to other Narrativist systems? Were there any?

Jump 20 years into the future.

Remembering when the 80s game came out, I feel old.

What are the differences here?

First, is dicelessness. Does this matter? Yes. The reason this matters is because it blatantly distinguishes this game from most more traditional rpgs. It won't have the superficial similarity to mainstream rpgs that the original MSH game had. It will open a lot of people's eyes to the fact that things can be done differently. The dicelessness doesn't matter because it is fortuneless. The dicelessness matters because it is unmistakenly different.

Second, there are other games out there today that support different styles of play, and there is the internet to provide access to them. The culture of gaming and the range of games available are much wider now than they were in the 80s. People who like the new MSH game might look for similar games on the net in other genres. They may well end up here.

Stuart

[Judd]

The old Marvel Super-Heroes RPG was my first gaming experience.  I remember my Etrigan rip-off, Hellborn fondly as my first character when I was about 12 years old.

I wasn't exactly looking at the game with a GNS-Critical eye but could someone explain to me why that game was innovative.

It is funny because I was talking about gaming with a buddy of mine and he said, "You know what game I'd like to play again?  Marvel, with the Unearthly stats and that little table on the back of the book.  That game rocked!"

I was baffled and I remain baffled.

Maybe this question should be a different thread but why is that game seen as a great one?

[M. J. Young]

The extent to which Magic players become role-players is not known to me.  If it's a lot, then new Marvel game may have a profound effect.

The (1997?) WotC survey found very little crossover between CCG and RPG players or markets. Magic players don't become role players in any great numbers, apparently.

But the movie analogy is inapt:  a movie isn't a comic book, but a game is a game.

This is a good point. Moviegoers may well go see Spiderman and Daredevil just because they're movies, and won't read the comics. Gamers may well play the Marvel Superheroes Game because it's a game, without reading the comics. We need a different example. The question is whether fans of A in form A will continue to be fans of A in form B--that is, not whether moviegoers become comic book readers, but whether comic book readers become moviegoers. Certainly the Spiderman movie had very little impact on the number of people reading Spiderman comics. I certainly didn't think of going out and buying the latest issue, and I use to enjoy reading Spiderman cough-ty years back. But I would bet that an awful lot of Spiderman comic book readers went to see that movie.

Why did I start playing D&D? I did it because in my mind at the time there was a connection, an idea that this was a game that might make it possible to create Lord of the Rings-type adventures in a game. (We'd tried the SPI bookcase game for that, and were sorely disappointed.) The thought was that if I enjoyed the story, I might enjoy the game. The connection here is stronger. If you enjoy the comic, you might enjoy the movie, and you might enjoy the game. An effort has been made to create a game that plays well and has the possibility of creating comic-book like adventures in play. In my view, that should bring at least some comic book people to gaming.

I don't think it works well the other way around. That is, I don't see the Dragonlance and Forgotten Realms books bringing readers to gaming. I don't see the D&D cartoon or the D&D movie bringing TV viewers or moviegoers to gaming. This sort of extension into another genre takes the existing fanbase and introduces it to a new mode of expression; those who already know that mode of expression may take interest in this new entry, but they don't significantly follow the train backwards to the other mode.

Marvel is inviting its fans to try a role playing game. Certainly it is also inviting gamers to try a Marvel role playing game. As far as this goes, it will bring more comic readers to taste gaming than it will bring gamers to taste comics. They are extending their fanbase to the new area; they are hoping to pick up new fans in that area, but probably don't expect to draw these back to their core medium.

So I think it should have some impact. But then, how did you get into gaming? Maybe my perspective is skewed from an unusual experience.

--M. J. Young

[Stuart DJ Purdie]

The question is whether fans of A in form A will continue to be fans of A in form B--that is, not whether moviegoers become comic book readers, but whether comic book readers become moviegoers.

The Buffy RPG has.  Not so much because of what it is inherently, but because it makes making a pitch easier.  Rather than a long discourse on the setting and mechanaics, it gets condensed right down to, "Wanna be Buffy?".  It's not foolproof, but it is a way in.

That's the power of these games.  It's not a foot in the door, it's not even a toe in the door, but just a toe nail.  And that can be enough.

[talysman]

I dunno, I keep seeing people like Brand explain why they think this new Marvel game is an exciting development, but it seems like other people are missing that point and instead going over familiar old arguments of "is it really innovative?" or "does crossover marketing really work?"

it's not about being innovative. so what if the game isn't innovative? most people buy games because they sound fun; only people who enjoy innovative games buy games that are innovative.

it's not about crossover marketing, although I'm sure Marvel is counting on a little of that to work in their favor.

it's about two things: eyeballs and ease-of-play.

make no mistake: Marvel doesn't care about bringing new people to the RPG hobby. they care about selling Marvel products. they want to sell a lot of copies of this new game. that may indirectly bring new people to the hobby, but that's not anywhere on Marvel's agenda.

so what is different about this incarnation of the Marvel Superheroes game? first is: more eyeballs. the previous Marvel game was a licensed product, created and marketed by TSR, which at the time was one of the biggest RPG companies around -- but just an RPG company. this game is a work-for-hire created for Marvel, which Marvel plans on marketting itself. it will get more shelf space and more sales outlets than the previous game, because Marvel has more pull than TSR ever did. that means more people will see the game.

still, that doesn't mean more people will buy or play the game. the game needs a smooth, simple design. it needs a rules system comparable to Monopoly or Go Fish, if Marvel expects to sell it to more than just hardcore gamers. so far, the description of the game sounds like it might meet this ease-of-play requirement.

this does not mean that Marvel will necessarily succeed in revitalizing RPGs. there are still other issues that can affect sales: the "RPG stigma", for example, or blowbakc from overhyped marketing, or maybe another fad will catch the public's interest and distract them from the new game.

but it definitely looks like something different will happen, for the simple reason that Marvel is not an RPG company, so they can't be expected to market their game the way White Wolf or Wizards of the Coast market their games.

[szilard]

Well... the new InQuest is out.

Based on a quick reading, I'm not sure how I feel about the game. There are some neat ideas, sure. The Lines of Experience and the Flashback Panels are especially nice touches.

On the other hand, GM-less play is (at least in the text) limited to fights.

The entire thing is written in a style that is probably intended to target people new to roleplaying. It came off (to me) as alternately condescending or somewhat ingnorant-sounding (This isn't like any other roleplaying game: there are NO dice!!). The writing is pretty easy to follow, but some nice summaries would have been useful.

What is printed in the magazine looks to be the bulk of the rules. Magic and Power armor aren't included. I suspect many other actions (Powers and Skills) are in the main book that aren't in the excerpt.

Stuart

[Jonathan Walton]

The entire thing is written in a style that is probably intended to target people new to roleplaying. It came off (to me) as alternately condescending or somewhat ingnorant-sounding (This isn't like any other roleplaying game: there are NO dice!!).

Damn!  About what I expected, but I was hoping for something better.  I'll probably pick it up at the Con this weekend and send my thoughts in after that.

I was really praying that they wouldn't take the "Hey kids!  Here's a type of game that you've never tried before!  But look!  We've made it simple and different so EVEN YOU will enjoy and understand it!" approach and instead just be "Hey, look at this!  Isn't this cool!"

Sigh.

At least it's a step in the right direction.

Later.
Jonathan

[Drew Stevens]

It's not actually that bad- it just assumes a familiarity with the trappings of roleplaying without any deeper idea of what's involved, rather than total ignorance, and explains how, yes, this is a roleplaying game with those trappings radically different or gone.

[Mike Holmes]

Right Drew, it's marketing.

The question is whether or not it's good marketing. Certrainly isn't targeting us, but then I didn't think it would. I'm just hoping it doesn't hurt us because people reading don't start to believe that this is the only innovative game in existence.

What would have been really cool would have been something like, "Leveraging off of todays best RPG technology, this game is totally innovative."

Where's Wujcik? Wonder what he thinks. :-)

Mike

[Andy Kitkowski]

Oops- I think I keep missing my "You have a new message in Topic X" emails. :)

I guess we could speculate more about what will happen (admittedly, my initial post was speculation curled up in a "Guys! Guys!  Lookit this! Guys!!" post), but I guess in the end we'll have to wait 2 years to see what really happens with this game.

On one hand, I'm thinking that the Vampire game brought tons of people into the hobby that wouldn't have touched or even noticed RPGs otherwise. I lived in Chicago when VtM 1E came out. It was a revolution. Maybe an "icky" one, but a revolution nonetheless. :) This would lead me to believe that something big can happen. Especially if Marvel just ignores the RPG community and focuses on their own crowd (IMO, this is the best thing that they can do to make this game really sell).

On the other hand, back in the days of Vampire 1E, there effectively wasn't an internet (BBSes, yeah, but nothing like the internet for common non-college folk), there were no MMORPGs, there weren't video and computer games coming out constantly that are as immersive and time-consuming as there are now. So the other side of me is thinking that "The Revolution" will MAYBE result in only bring One Dude and his 4 Buddies to GenCON.

I guess we can drop the speculation, then, and just sit back and wait.

Oh, and Valamir had a point, too- I was also excited that something this mainstream was using a new mechanic.  I mean, all the other big licensed products these days: Buffy, Star Wars, Hellboy, Judge Dredd. Attributes. Skills. Dice. Character Sheets. 4-6 players and 1 GM. No matter how they spice up the license, it just feels like another Anygame with window dressing.

This is something that's... well... obviously different enough for people to sit up and take notice.  I'm excited, hoping that maybe our RPG clansmen will be more open to alternative systems in RPGs, and that in maybe 2-3 years more mainstream games will come out where the designer has an idea for a game, and builds the system from the ground up (like y'all do here at the Forge) rather than "What (existing) system do we use? What is our attribute list? What is our skill list?"

(on MSH:) Its design features correspond to all the concepts that Andy is so enthused about for this new game, although perhaps not as overtly.

Hmmm.  I've never played the original one, although I leafed through it once.

I know that the resource stones are just, when it comes down to it, another form of "dice" (as resolution mechanic). Still, though, it's really an interesting concept, to go from "randomizing dice with resource management" (with resources like Force Points, Drama Points, Cool Dice ala Sorcerer/Dread/Exalted, Dice pools, etc) to one of "resource management only with no randomizer".

I guess to end my post here, I'll once again state the point of my original post:
"Hey Guys!  Guys! Lookit this over here!  Wow! Lookit!"  :)

-Andy

[John Harper]

I went to my FLCBS to buy the InQuest Marvel RPG preview issue (my FLGS was sold out). The conversation at the counter:

Store Owner: Huh. These InQuest magazines... sometimes I sell a lot of them, and sometimes they sit and gather dust.

Me: Well, I'm buying this one for the Marvel RPG preview stuff.

SO: Oh yeah... they were just soliciting for that. It's a hardcover? For 30 dollars or something. I wasn't gonna bring any in. Do you think anyone would buy that?

Me (stunned): Um. Well, yeah. I plan to buy it, but I'm a gamer and I buy almost every new game. I bet some comic fans will get into it, though. Then again, you know your customers better than I do.

SO: Hmmm. Maybe I'll bring in 2 copies and see how they do. Thanks for the feedback.

--------

Uh. Wow. This guy runs a very popular and well-stocked comic book store in Seattle (Zanadu, on 45th). He's been in the comic book biz for a long, long time. And he wasn't going to stock any Marvel RPG books. Based on a single anecdotal experience, I'd say crossover between comic readers and gamers might be pretty minimal.

After giving the rules a good going-over, I have to say I'm pretty pleased. They have lots and lots of fiddly-bits and tactical decisions that affect play, and resolution is very fast. In the examples, no fight goes for more than 2 actions per character. I like the notion that a character succeeds or fails based on how important the action is to the PC. It would be nice if the game had more of an explicit system for "what's important to you?" but I guess that comes across in the decisions you make during play.

The way the system conflates toughness and dodge is a concern (they both add to "defense"), but I can see that it probably works fine in play.

My current play style is much more rules-lite than this, but I plan to buy the game and at least run a playtest or two before making up my mind.

[Brand_Robins]

SO: Oh yeah... they were just soliciting for that. It's a hardcover? For 30 dollars or something. I wasn't gonna bring any in. Do you think anyone would buy that?

Well, that doesn't look good for my hopes.

Of course I find that a little odd, as right now the Marvel hardback collections/graphic novels seem to be selling pretty well -- and they're around 30 bucks. (I just picked up the Ultimate Spiderman and Ultimate X-Men ones.) So it isn't that comics fans won't pay 30 bucks for a book -- more like they won't play 30 bucks for a game in a book.

Ah well, at least they're trying.

[Jonathan Walton]

The obvious thing, it seems to me, is to have almost 1/2 of the game text (or, heck, all of it) be done in a comic book format.  I mean, we've seen "Understanding Comics."  We know that you can use the comic medium to explain things, so why not use it as the medium for explaining a game about comics?  I mean, at least have an example of play done like that (cref -- Vampire: Dark Ages).

I'm astounded that someone hasn't done this already.  With Hellboy, Prince Valiant, and all the superhero schlock out there, why doesn't someone write an RPG as a comic?  Heck, James West would be a good person to do it, since he's already doing Random Comics & Games.

Later.
Jonathan