RE: [DL] RE: deadlands-digest.20031207

well I seldom pipe up her ebut might as well.

Having produced 2 items for shane (big cheesy grin just waiting to be shot off) I can trully appreciate the need to keep your product s new and diverse. The RPG market around the world is dead right now with a lot of the smaller companies going under. Only something that can really claim to be new stands a chance of pulling in the serious survival dollars as they say. I am a classic system and genre player until they wrap me in my shroud, but I , as I believe was said earlier by someone, accept that this is inevitable..... plus, is it really all that hard to convert from savage into the old system.... not really, it's the ideas and passion that run the adventures, not the mechanics behind the setting, those are there to be altered and abused as we see fit...

(Ducks and runs for cover.....)

"Pinder, John F (MED)" <John.Pinder@med.ge.com> wrote:

Howdy y'all,
Being very new to this mailing list, and this being my first post to it, I feel like I'm butting in here, but I've been with other lists with various other systems and what many of you are feeling is being felt everywhere. I think the biggest fear is many companies have sunk a lot of money into the D20 system. This system has absorbed almost every game out in the market, almost like a corporate takeover, just not as official. I'm sure that this was not an easy decision for Pinnacle to make and even more sure that they worked tirelessly to put this new system out. The fear is that should D20 fall by the wayside, what happens then? Do the companies have enough to go back to the "old way" or are they going to fold because so much money got tied up into the new system? The best way to insure longevity is to keep playing; keep the demand high. As was said before, no one is holding a gun to your head to play D20, but keep playing regardless. Another system I play is 7th Sea (Now Swashbuckling Adventures) and they are continuing with the old system as well as the new but this won't go on forever I'm sure. The creativity of the old system is there and will rely on the imaginations of the gamers to keep it alive. That's the way of the world as it stands right now, but you really can't blame Shane and other companies doing what they can to keep the gaming market alive while generating revenue at the same time. The old saying is that "change is good...even if you don't like it". I, for one, don't really like it, but I understand it.

I will now take cover as I feel like many irons may turn in my direction. :)

Hope I didn't step on any toes here.

"He looks dead to me, pa."

"I reckon...but he looked dead yesterday, too."

Well said, Brett.

My decision remains, but know that you're being listened to (and were previously).

Shane

In a message dated 12/8/2003 10:59:20 AM Eastern Standard Time, balance@tubas.net writes:

On Dec 8, 2003, at 12:21 AM, Phalen, Pat wrote:
> Let me state my views more clearly.
> NOBODY is forcing you to stop playing "Classic" and making you play
> "Savage"
> If you have run out of "canon" material, congratulations.
> That's all I'm saying. There are 40+ books/supplements and various
> Web Archives that can keep you playing Classic until the cows come
> home.
> If not, the compendiums should give you more than enough inspiration
> to keep your game going and going and going.
> Be happy that Shane is doing whatever he can to keep interest in the
> genre and keep the setting alive (ok harrowed)
> But what do I know, since we're still stuck in 1873.

I have an issue here: No printed books means that, to many gamers, the
system is dead. Yes, no one is taking away my copies, but convincing a
new group to play is difficult. A lot of gamers I know dislike playing
in a game where they don't own the core rules, and PDF rulebooks
requiring printouts to make an inferior version just aren't the same.

Some groups just won't play Savage Worlds... Some don't like the loss
of fine detail in the mechanics [1].

I've argued against this decision because I do feel it is a bad idea.
I'd like to see Shane do well, and I think putting all his eggs in one
basket on something that has, unfortunately, already taken some hits
due to other management issues[2].

Still, I feel I've done what I can. I admit I don't see every side of
the story. I don't know the financial issues, or the actual sales
numbers, or a lot of other behind the scenes stuff.

I do know it would be wrong to not let Shane, who I respect, know that
disagree.[3]

[1] And, note, I'm talking about the basic resolution mechanics, not
things like the arcane background system that may change when Reloaded
ships.

[2] Don't read too much into this, but I think the multiple versions of
the Deadlands rules (Classic, d20, GURPS, and Savage Worlds) has
fragmented it and damaged the games 'reputation.' Additionally, the
Cybergames fiasco and other events haven't helped. he books are still
good, but the brand is tarnished, and I think that a ultra-revised
Classic rerelease would help more than porting to yet another system
and doing a 'Deadlands Lite' version of the setting.

[3] As a final note, I try to keep these discussions civil. No personal
attacks, no flames, etc.

--
Brett

LORD, WHAT CAN THE HARVEST HOPE FOR, IF NOT FOR THE CARE OF THE REAPER
MAN? (Reaper Man, Terry Pratchett)

To unsubscribe, send a message to esquire@gamerz.net with
unsubscribe deadlands@gamerz.net
as the BODY of the message. The SUBJECT is ignored.