The Grognard Problem

[RainOfSteel]

Originally posted by Casey:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Aramis:
and again you would prove your stubborn arrogant ignorance. The first D&D edition (1974-1977) in the little brown or white books DID separate race and class. It had not resolution methods other than to hit rolls, saves and spell casting.

The edition of which you speak, commonly referred to as "Old D&D" (OD&D) on the net, is 1978-1994. Not the one of which I spoke. And it's the spur line; AD&D diverges at the same time.

I have core rules for ALL editions of D&D, and have run them all. Classic, or LBB/LWB D&D, is a far less polished beastie.

Your definitions differ from what I've seen online. </font>[/QUOTE]Casey,

What you have seen agrees with what I have seen.

However, I tend to refer to "Classic D&D" as "D&D Basic to Immortals" just so it's blindingly obvious what I'm talking about.

 

[Malenfant]

FWIW, this is what I started on:
http://www.acaeum.com/DDIndexes/SetPages/SetScans/Basic9Rule.html

I've heard "basic", "classic", and "original" D&D used to describe that. The previous versions are largely irrelevant nowadays, other than as historical artifacts.

 

[flykiller]

However is it still D&D? It is to the people who run and play it. And that's *all* that really matters in the end.

well ... if they're playing (for example) star trek, and calling it traveller, it's fair to say there's a glitch somewhere.

given the now vast range of rulesets, versions, and ruleset tweaks, not to mention house rulesets (glances at a thick notebook), perhaps it is difficult to speak of any clear boundary between one game and another. and this would be the fault of us who take our games where we want them to go and play what we want and who don't care if anyone speaks ill of it. one sees traveller fans calling for new traveller rules that account for all science fiction tropes such as warp drive, which would blur distinctions even further. the newer market, who if they find a game is not complete or no longer supported will throw it away and curse the company that made it, certainly aren't responsible for this.

it is difficult for anyone who makes their own rules and their own game to say that this is a bad thing, or that some results of this process are invalid. the line fades. still, it helps to be able to refer to a set of expectations, even if they are only a starting point. certainly this matters to sellers at least, who have to be able to say what it is that they're selling.

a lot of us expect traveller to have some basis in reality and above all to avoid the fantastic. some other games, however, are based on heroic fantasy, with certain aspects of real life deprecated in favor of the fantasy - which every grognard will recognize as being the principle of "never let the rules get in the way of a good story."

for traveller, the real is a fundamental part of the story. when the fantastic is implemented in it, you then have a different game. and we call it different. that's all.

 

[Malenfant]

Again, this isn't a problem if you separate the system from the setting.

You can play in the Star Trek setting using Traveller rules. You'd probably call that 'Star Trek' though. If you called it Traveller then people would come into it with certain expectations (mostly of the setting).

You can play in the Traveller setting using one of the Star Trek rulesets. You'd probably call that "Traveller" though.

You can play in your own scifi universe that has nothing in common with the OTU and use the Traveller rules, but I think you'd be hardpressed to call that "Traveller". Again, because "Traveller" has its own set of expectations associated with it (1 week in jump, Imperium, Emperors etc). I certainly wouldn't label any of my scifi settings that I've made with Traveller rules as "Traveller".

 

[BrennanHawkwood]

Originally posted by Malenfant:
Again, this isn't a problem if you separate the system from the setting.

Agreed...the system used does have some impact on the the way things play out, but by and large the setting should be the more defining point when it comes to the question of "what am I playing?"

This is especially true with "modern" and sci-fi games such as Traveller given the wide number of relatively open ended rulesets that are available and used to run games in various settings and the increased emphasis on the setting as an important definition of what the players will be experiencing.

It should be true of fantasy games as well, but I think so many people start their gaming experience with D&D in a mode where the setting just determines which baddie they are going to smite this weekend. This results in a tendency for many to approach it from the point of view that they are playing a D&D game that happens to be set in Greyhawk or Eberron or Cerilia or where ever. Some of us grow out of that...others don't.

Originally posted by Malenfant:
FWIW, this is what I started on:
http://www.acaeum.com/DDIndexes/SetPages/SetScans/Basic9Rule.html

By the way, that is effectively what I started gaming with as well.

 

[daltoncalford]

It has come down to the fact that Cannon has separated from the rules.

Traveller started without Cannon.

It was a generic scifi rule set, just as D&D was a generic Fantasy rule set.

The original cannon material was generated from the rules. After the random rule generation system created an environment, imaginations ran wild and populated the environment with detail.
On top of the fleshed out rule mechanics, were some overall universe concepts that were later shown to be totally out to lunch (fleet strengths, travel times to the core and back (as used in background stories).

Over the past few months (weird how time flies) I have had over 20 gaming sessions, averaging at least twice a week. I started with CT and MT generated characters. I used what I knew about the "Cannon" universe, and I diverged from there.

I call it Traveller due to using UPP's and it's Traveller roots, but, not one of the rule systems are even remotely like any of the varieties of traveller released over the years.

I have dumped the majority of the traveller cannon. Created my own precursor races, (most of which I don't have to flesh out right now thanks to most of it being a mystery to the players so it can remain a mystery to me)

I have created alot of things from scratch including a space combat system that works.

I happen to own all the versions of traveller ever released except for a few of DGP's books since I was never able to find them.

I don't care what material Marc produces, as it will have very little impact on my gaming, unless he comes up with some wonderful new concept that I never thought of. I will buy what he produces, just as I bought the D20 system, to see what new concepts that are being shown.

So, as a very old time grognard, who played the original D&D that did not come with dice but that you cut up the back cover to have chits to put into a hat to act as dice.....I do not think the rules, the cannon, the book format or any other item of the game matters except......

IT SHOULD BE POPULAR ENOUGH TO MAKE ENOUGH MONEY THAT NEW STUFF IS CREATED AND PUBLISHED!!!
(sorry for yelling)

So, to anybody who does depend upon this stuff for a living, if you actually are reading these posts from old time players, remember, you have already sold the product to them. Publishing the same old stuff will not generate a larger market. Go ahead, get crazy, create the piece of art you are dreaming of and forget all that came before. If it is good, laugh all the way to the bank. If it is crap, the old time players will still have their original materials and keep the game alive.

just my 2c worth, as I finish my translation of all the systems within 1000ly of earth to a 3d parsec hex-grid.

best regards

Dalton

 

[RainOfSteel]

I started on AD&D, but couldn't afford the books, and so fell into D&D Basic/Expert as a less expensive alternative.

Man! $15.00 for the DMG, and $12.00 for the Player's Handbook, Monster Manual, and Deities & Demigods (w/Melnibone, Cthulhu, and Nehwon). Ouch! Too expensive.

 

[RickA]

Originally posted by RainOfSteel:
I started on AD&D, but couldn't afford the books, and so fell into D&D Basic/Expert as a less expensive alternative.

Man! $15.00 for the DMG, and $12.00 for the Player's Handbook, Monster Manual, and Deities & Demigods (w/Melnibone, Cthulhu, and Nehwon). Ouch! Too expensive.

/Fondly remembers his school library photocopy of the 1st Edition DM's guide done a few pages at a time when coins could be scraped together/

 

[Malenfant]

So, to anybody who does depend upon this stuff for a living, if you actually are reading these posts from old time players, remember, you have already sold the product to them. Publishing the same old stuff will not generate a larger market. Go ahead, get crazy, create the piece of art you are dreaming of and forget all that came before. If it is good, laugh all the way to the bank. If it is crap, the old time players will still have their original materials and keep the game alive.

That's the point though. You've said you'd buy T5 regardless of whether it's good or crap, and that you're happy with what you've got. Why would you do that? Why would you waste your money on something that you wouldn't use, or that by then you might know is crap and useless to you? Out of some kind of misguided loyalty to Marc? If you need the product, buy it. But buying it just for its own sake doesn't send any meaningful signals to Marc, other than that there's mugs out there who'd probably buy his used toilet paper if it was signed by him ( ).

 

[daltoncalford]

Originally posted by Malenfant:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />So, to anybody who does depend upon this stuff for a living, if you actually are reading these posts from old time players, remember, you have already sold the product to them. Publishing the same old stuff will not generate a larger market. Go ahead, get crazy, create the piece of art you are dreaming of and forget all that came before. If it is good, laugh all the way to the bank. If it is crap, the old time players will still have their original materials and keep the game alive.

That's the point though. You've said you'd buy T5 regardless of whether it's good or crap, and that you're happy with what you've got. Why would you do that? Why would you waste your money on something that you wouldn't use, or that by then you might know is crap and useless to you? Out of some kind of misguided loyalty to Marc? If you need the product, buy it. But buying it just for its own sake doesn't send any meaningful signals to Marc, other than that there's mugs out there who'd probably buy his used toilet paper if it was signed by him ( ). </font>[/QUOTE]Not Quite, I said, If it is good, laugh all the way to the bank, if it is crap, the grognards won't care since they have the original.

I personally, have quite a collection of materials, from a variety of different games, largely due to the fact that I gleam ideas from all of them.

I would love Marc to generate something totally different, perhaps dropping everything that people think is traveller. If he comes up with something, great. It would be far better than the reams of rehashed drivel being created these days.

D&D survived to this day, not because it had the best system, but, because it had the best PR (yes, bad PR, but, that is what drew alot of people to it)

I was playing LoTR from Decipher a few years back and mentioned the game to my Pastor, and he said "Great!, good to hear you are giving up Dungeons and Dragons" while his kids said "Can you teach us D&D instead"

Yup, if they hounded Traveller in the early 80's the same way they hounded D&D, we would be talking the 2D6 Fantasy system vs the D20 traveller system.

There are hundreds of different mechanics out there, and some are great for certain gaming settings, but, I doubt that any one system is good for all settings.

I have a mechanic our group uses, and loves. I would not use it for high fantasy. It is perfect for a gritty, hard scifi game.

If marc put somthing new together, I would probably buy it. But, unless it is good, I will be one of the few.

best regards

Dalton

 

[Malenfant]

Originally posted by Dalton:
Not Quite, I said, If it is good, laugh all the way to the bank, if it is crap, the grognards won't care since they have the original.

Yes, but if it's crap or not what you're looking for or not anything that you'd actually need then don't buy it.

There is such a thing as waiting til someone reviews it, or actually looking at a product before you blindly pick it up you know...

It would be far better than the reams of rehashed drivel being created these days.

What 'rehashed drivel'? Burning Wheel? Iron Heroes? WFRP v2? Ars Magica?

D&D survived to this day, not because it had the best system, but, because it had the best PR (yes, bad PR, but, that is what drew alot of people to it)

Probably both, actually.

I was playing LoTR from Decipher a few years back and mentioned the game to my Pastor, and he said "Great!, good to hear you are giving up Dungeons and Dragons" while his kids said "Can you teach us D&D instead"

Why, did he think that playing D&D would turn you to devil worship or something? I can't believe there are still people who think that...

Yup, if they hounded Traveller in the early 80's the same way they hounded D&D, we would be talking the 2D6 Fantasy system vs the D20 traveller system.

No, we wouldn't. D&D has one key difference to Traveller, which is a significant part of why it caught on and Traveller didn't - namely that in D&D you are HEROES. In Traveller you're just ordinary joes. And people generally like to play heroes or larger than life characters, not a dock loader on a starport or a wrench monkey in a spaceship.

If marc put somthing new together, I would probably buy it. But, unless it is good, I will be one of the few.

Again, that's the thing. Don't buy it unless you know it's good - otherwise you're just throwing money away. It's just basic common sense really.

 

[flykiller]

I propose three levels of fandom.

1) grognards. people who do it themselves and who view the copyright holders as optional sources of material.

2) consumers. people who pay for a complete product and who if they don't get it throw away what they have and move on in search of a complete product.

3) spectators. people who pay for drama, art, and literature produced by professionals.

I see ct as being oriented towards the first group, and the present efforts as being oriented towards the second (more profitable) group. I suggest the real money is in the third.

 

[Malenfant]

Your classifications have absolutely nothing to do with reality, and are pretty arbitrary and dismissive to boot. You're still clinging to this incorrect idea that most people buy games just to ogle them. You are completely wrong.

First, everyone is a "consumer". A consumer is "One that consumes, especially one that acquires goods or services for direct use or ownership rather than for resale or use in production and manufacturing." If you buy any RPG, you are therefore a consumer.

"Spectactors" buy novels, watch movies and TV, go to art museums etc. The whole point of RPGs is that it's interactive, not passive spectacle. What about people who buy the books with the intent of playing it but can't find games to play? Do you just dismiss them as just 'spectators'? Even those fans who buy the books and end up just reading them to read or discuss do something more with them than just passively read. If you want to cater to 'spectators' then go write a novel.

Most people buy RPGs with the intent to play them or at least use parts of them for their own games.
If they don't like what's there, they tinker with the system til they're happy with it. If they can't get it to a satisfactory state, then they either sell it off, or it sits on their shelves never to be looked at again, or they take what is salvageable out of it and use that in their own games. Sometimes they just buy it to read the background or to see how the rules work, but either way, ideas are there to be used elsewhere.

"The real money" is in the current RPG market. T20 and GURPS has made Traveller more relevant because they use systems that a lot of people already know. But the background remains fundamantally anachronistic and there are many contradictions and ambiguities.

If you don't appeal to the current RPG market, then you will always be a niche product. Marc claims to want to make T5 appeal to as wide a group of people as possible, but in practice he is doing the exact opposite - making it appeal to a tiny niche within the Traveller community only.

I'd suggest that perhaps you should make an attempt to understand how the RPG market and community really works, and not try to impose classifications on it that are based on your own inaccurate beliefs.

 

[flykiller]

further, I would suggest that the "grognard problem" isn't a problem with the grognards, rather it's a problem of which market demographic upon which to focus. the grognards while enthusiastic are a small unreliable market. they are loudly opinionated and are as likely to reject a game, good or bad, as accept it. the consumers are much more numerous, and once they accept a system and setting are much more likely to buy into it in toto on an ongoing basis. much more reliable money to be made here. but of course the biggest market of all is in the spectator demographic. look at star wars, star trek, firefly, stargate, babylon 5, dune, et al. big business and big bucks built around a professionally created and professionally presented storyline that spectators will shell out big bucks to see.

the solution here is simple. ignore the grognards, they've done their job and their day is done. take the next step and move forward with a professional consumer product to further establish the storyline. when that ball is rolling as fast as it can go, move forward again to the professionally prepared professionally run spectator product that anyone can enjoy just by watching it.

I mean, really, traveller has enough background and scope to take it far beyond star trek or babylon 5 or even star wars. it could be done.

 

[Malenfant]

Originally posted by flykiller:
[QB]they are loudly opinionated and are as likely to reject a game, good or bad, as accept it.

No, they're more likely to reject a new version of a game than accept it.

the consumers are much more numerous, and once they accept a system and setting are much more likely to buy into it in toto on an ongoing basis. much more reliable money to be made here. but of course the biggest market of all is in the spectator demographic.

Again, a statement not backed up by reality, since your classifications are flawed.

look at star wars, star trek, firefly, stargate, babylon 5, dune, et al. big business and big bucks built around a professionally created and professionally presented storyline that spectators will shell out big bucks to see.

That is not even remotely why they buy it, and that is not even remotely the type of fan that buys it either.

Licenses based on series or films are always popular because they attract fans of the film/show to the game (many of whom are into or open to RPGs anyway). There are invariably more fans of a media show than there are of an original RPG setting.

Plus, licenses look good anyway. They have footage from the films or shows, they get vetted by the studios, so they're usually good quality games too.

They're not more "professionally presented" than any other high-end product on the RPG market. Neither are they more "professionally created". The same people who write the other RPGs write the licensed products too.

And again, it's not "Spectators" that buy these things at all - they buy the Tech books and art books and other stuff associated with the shows. The fact that people are buying the RPGs means that they're not 'spectators'.

the solution here is simple. ignore the grognards

We agree on that at least. The grognards should have got the hint with TNE.

take the next step and move forward with a professional consumer product to further establish the storyline.

Again, this 'professional consumer product' is exactly what everyone is producing nowadays anyway. It's not a case of someone in a garage stapling books together, RPG is an industry now - a small one admittedly, but it's an industry nonetheless.

when that ball is rolling as fast as it can go, move forward again to the professionally prepared professionally run spectator product that anyone can enjoy just by watching it.

You really have no idea what you're talking about, that much is apparent.

I mean, really, traveller has enough background and scope to take it far beyond star trek or babylon 5 or even star wars. it could be done.

Er, no. Not even remotely. You'll note that those shows focus on a small part of the universe - a space station, or a few worlds. Plus they follow a specific format - planet/monster of the week, unfolding metaplot (which Classic Traveller certainly lacks - MT and TNE corrected that somewhat but guess what, the grognards hated it) etc.

Traveller is so generic that you could run any scifi show or movie in it probably. But there are products out there that allow you to do that a lot better than Traveller does.

 

[robject]

Originally posted by Malenfant:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by flykiller:
[QB]they are loudly opinionated and are as likely to reject a game, good or bad, as accept it.

No, they're more likely to reject a new version of a game than accept it.
</font>[/QUOTE]We've seen this with T4 (editing notwithstanding).

Traveller is so generic that you could run any scifi show or movie in it probably. But there are products out there that allow you to do that a lot better than Traveller does.

I didn't used to think about this, but both Mr. Thomas and Mr. Miller convinced me of this. A product is always targetted.

 

[flykiller]

A product is always targetted.

well yes, that's what I'm talking about, the product and the target audience. listen to what some of the grognards including me are saying - "we don't care if t5 comes out." you can't sell much to that market. now the consumers are a much larger market and very accessible to an organization that puts out a consumable product on a regular basis. and traveller, the traveller setting, is quite capable of putting out an enormous supply of consumable game product. new races, wonderful worlds, great battles, vast panoramic adventures, all lavishly illustrated and depicted. just step in and roll the dice. it could be done. it is being done. but these are just the intermediary target audience. out there, waiting in the wings, untouched, is a whole 'nuther audience that is just waiting to plunk down their money to spectate.

it's a simple next step. grognards think of people like marc miller and Mr. Martin J. Dougherty as being just other refs. well, make them THE ref. not just the owners, but also the operators, of a professionally produced and professionally run game, in which everyone can participate vicariously. think of the advantages. no slaving for hours to come up with something that will fly in a game of only a few people. no scheduling difficulties. no more asking, "what were we doing last month?" no wondering about broken deckplans, whether to divide by three or four or five, or cobbling together a bunch of disparate imaginations into a shared game picture. no gathering around a ping-pong table in a garage. no wondering what to do if half the players don't show up. no wondering if anyone will show up at all. instead, a massive setting fully organized and integrated by professional designers, a fully depicted and graphically illustrated scene by professional artists, housing a wonderful storyline crafted by professional authors. and all of it available when the individual audience members are ready on their own time.

I mean, come on. which will sell better? look at babylon 5, star trek, cowboy beebop. where's the real market here, in do-it-yourself amateur gaming or vicarious spectating? look at any football stadium. where's the money, in selling footballs or selling tickets?

traveller the business, to expand, needs to stop binking around selling game systems and game settings, and start selling games.

 

[Malenfant]

I give up. You still insist that this 'spectacting' assessment of yours is valid. It isn't. You still go on about 'professional designers', who have some miraculous ability to make something sell. Well, as I said, everybody in this industry is as 'professional' as eachother - some are better at some things than others though, that's all.

Plus I get the feeling I'm talking to a brick wall anyway. You really have little clue about how the RPG industry works at all, and what the market is like. Please, feel free to carry on with your hands over your ears and saying "LALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU!".

 

[Jeff M. Hopper]

There's a grognard problem?

 

[Badbru]

Well I agree with many of Flykillers points.

It's about time Traveller had a new computer game.

I'm eagerly waiting for the next in Martins Diaspora Phoenix line of books.

I'd also like to see his Lisa "Lander" Davies stories available again.

I'd happily buy more adventure material.

But do I need another rules system - No.