Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Thoughts about Mage 5th

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Trippy
    replied
    Originally posted by PMárk View Post

    Potential language barrier misunderstanding here. I meant that the editions between those two. V2, Revised, V20. The system remained the same, largely and the setting developed, expanded, but not changed dramatically. Well, you might argue that it changed during 2e in comparison to the 1e core, but that was ver, very early on, practically within a year.
    Each edition was a product of it’s time and addressed issues highlighted at the time. V5 is no different, but as a mark of natural evolution - it’s the best edition.

    From my point of view, it restricts it into a limited breth of options in comparsion to earlier stuff and not just V20, so
    That’s your perspective, but your experience from your own account starts with Revised. This being the edition specifically designed to include more stuff in a cataloguing manner - which was continued and expanded on with V20. V1 and V2, by this standard, were also limited - although they expanded with supplements. This seems likely the trend with V5.

    probably yes, because for me, those things are essential to the game since i started came into contact with it. Objectively, they are part of the game since early 2e, so, again, 99% of the game's existence was like that. That's likely one of the main reasons why we will never see eye-to-eye on this.
    You are picking arbitrary stats out of the air and stating them as facts. There is no objectivity on this issue. There is always going to a selective process on what you include or don’t include in any book. V5 remains as a continuation of everything written previously - but it doesn’t have to cram everything into one book.

    And how much of that was you? Also, I'm not saying one can't learn the game with it. Again, new players started with V20 and the other 20ths. I've learned games I enjoyed from far worse books than V5. I'm still saying, comparing it to the Revised corebook, the later is a clearly better corebook. Much clearer and encompassing material (even had a history section, which helped a lot understanding the setting) with more options in a much shorter corebook. Again, this is true for the Sect books. Even lot of the V5 fans acknowledge that the Anarch book is well, just not a good book about how the Anarchs work and point to the revised book, or the V20 book.
    If it’s all down to me as a teacher, then you can take my educated assessment that V5 is perfectly fine as a tool and a source for teaching new players. The Revised book was bloated in my view. V20 even more so. They were also reaching out to lower audiences - by design in the case of V20, and by virtue of declining sales figures in the case of VRev.


    I can acknowledge that V5 is a good game,
    Good.

    doubt that's because of the stellar success of V5.More like the IP is back on the map, Bloodlines 2 is happening and lots of people want a share of this.
    Modiphius don’t have a stake in Bloodlines 2. They are publishing, and now developing the tabletop game.


    "NWoD" is still around. D&D 4 was around for quite a few years. The 20ths showed there is at least as much demand for the old setting than for the new. D&D 5 is a massive success while being a totally unimaginitive, but well-presented and marketed, accessible nostalgia edition, that discarded most of 4e. Shadowrun 5e had thrown out a lot of stuff 4e did too. Sure V5 will be there for 4-6 years at least. Then, who knows?
    V5 has outsold all of these, and it’s being supported and developed now. I don’t care what is happening in 4-6 years.

    Oh, come on! You're kidding right? V1 was controversial culturally and within the bigger gaming scene. V5 is divisive and cotnroversial within the existing WoD fanbase.
    Were you there to experience it when it started? And maybe it’s the case that the 'existing fanbase’, at least in some parts, has become a bit comfortable and conservative and needed a bit of a shake up?


    And I won't. Nor my group(s). Or most of the Hungarian scene as far as I can tell.
    As far as you can tell......


    Yeah, but I and others like me won't get any new books either. Well, there's some really good stuff on the ST's Vault, sure, but I never thought I'd be this cold toward new WoD books coming out, ever and it's sad.
    I think it’s sad that people can’t get out of their own bubble and move on if they don’t like something. I mean we were talking about Mage, or a potential new Mage, and all we’ve now got is an invasion of people complaining about V5. It’s like an obsession.
    Last edited by Trippy; 12-19-2019, 03:02 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • PMárk
    replied
    Originally posted by Trippy View Post
    It’s funny - when you talk to different groups. Most non-Vampire fans didn’t think WoD mattered anymore, before it started making the charts again with V5.
    As a new edition back on the shelves (and IcV2 only took into account the physical stores), that's normal. It's still a small fish compared to its heyday, or compared to the other big names. Again, let's see how the charts will be long-term, when the "OMG, there's a new edition of VtM out in the wild" effect wears off. It might well be successfull long-term, i'll acknowledge that. That won't change my oppinion on it. I acknowledge D&D 5e's massive success too and see the reasons, but I'm still mostly disinterested in it and not buying their books, instead playing 3.5 as it satisfies my needs a lot more at this point.


    It goes against some fans’ preferences on this site - which is a tiny proportion of the overall fanbase.
    Even on the beiigest fb groups and reddit and so, I'l call it even at best. Likely more pro V20 than pro V5 voices, but that could be just my bias.

    Yes - but the people creatively directing it, and then being approved, are Matthew Dawkins and co.
    Still bound by the direction and approval of Martin and co. Also, again, it's not about who does it, I liked Matthew work on V20, not so much of what he wrote for V5. It's not about his capabilities as a writer and developer, I just don't like the material, in comparison, for its content, not its style, or overall quality. These books might be very good and I still won't like the general changes and direction of V5.

    Well, again, don’t buy it. Do accept, however, that if you’re not buying it, then ultimately your view of it doesn’t matter because your aren’t in the know about how it continues to be developed.
    I can borrow, I can read reviews, I can read message boards, groups and such. I can pretty much inform myself about where it is going, while still vote with my vallet.

    Matthew Dawkins was on board from the start.
    No. The core ideas of V5 was presented on events practically at the second day of the acquisition. They brought him in much later. If they had contact with him before that, I don't know.

    His Beckett’s Diary book was a segue towards the V5 changes and he was one of the writers of V5.
    Again, BJD was still in development while the core ideas of V5 were presented by Martin on events much earlier. Yes, later on they said that BJD is the metplot bible leading up to V5 and brought in Matthew. After, mind you, the first great backlash of the first playtest. Also, they used very little actually from BJD this far. My personal oppinion? All the talk was to appease exactly the concerned "old fans", but it didn't change much about the intitial concept, which they already had at the very beginning, much before BJD and Matthew's participation.

    He remains the creative developer of the supplements that follow.
    And what, suddenly the most egregious stuff that angered lots of fans will be retconned? Don't think so. Moreover, he seems being largely on board with the V5 direction, which, again, I don't fault him for. I think he'll take steps to bridge some of the gaps, but it won't change the basic assumptions.

    Well, you are wrong on both counts.
    You're welcome to think so.

    The meta plot was developed to segue between editions,
    Won't get into the argument of how much it is a logical development totally maintaining continuity or how much is it a semi-hard reboot. It was talked to death and we clearly on differing oppinions. Let's leave it at that.

    and the point of reference to the Player’s Guide is it is explicitly a book about changing the setting and themes to your own tastes.
    And they also said there won't be an alternative morality system, for example, which is one of the most thorny issues from day one. But that's just one thing. I don't expect anything fundamental. Likely it'll be some minor alternative rules, or extrapolations on this or that element. It won't bridge the gap between the earlier editions and V5.


    I don’t think they’ve mentioned much about Predator types just yet, and I think they are checking on whether they can include all the additional Clans in one place at the moment, but here’s the blurb:

    Oh, that. Yeah. I've seen it. Mostly usual marketing speech, if you ask me. Again, I don't expect anything that fundamentally changes the base assumptions of V5.

    Leave a comment:


  • PMárk
    replied
    Originally posted by Trippy View Post
    That doesn’t follow at all. I mean how can you say that the first edition of the game was or wasn’t changing the setting and system radically.....from what exactly?! It was the first edition of the game! So I’m not sure what point you are trying to make here.
    Potential language barrier misunderstanding here. I meant that the editions between those two. V2, Revised, V20. The system remained the same, largely and the setting developed, expanded, but not changed dramatically. Well, you might argue that it changed during 2e in comparison to the 1e core, but that was ver, very early on, practically within a year.

    We can agree to disagree, but speaking as somebody who remembers and still owns the 1st editions of all the original WoD games, I think that V5 is the best realization of concepts and themes that were always in the game - and everything about the design augments this.
    From my point of view, it restricts it into a limited breth of options in comparsion to earlier stuff and not just V20, so

    It’s probably the case that a lot of what you like in previous editions, I regard as fluff and extrapolations that detract from the core concepts.
    probably yes, because for me, those things are essential to the game since i started came into contact with it. Objectively, they are part of the game since early 2e, so, again, 99% of the game's existence was like that. That's likely one of the main reasons why we will never see eye-to-eye on this.

    And I disagree that it does a bad job of presenting the setting and teaching the game - from the practical experience of doing so with it.
    And how much of that was you? Also, I'm not saying one can't learn the game with it. Again, new players started with V20 and the other 20ths. I've learned games I enjoyed from far worse books than V5. I'm still saying, comparing it to the Revised corebook, the later is a clearly better corebook. Much clearer and encompassing material (even had a history section, which helped a lot understanding the setting) with more options in a much shorter corebook. Again, this is true for the Sect books. Even lot of the V5 fans acknowledge that the Anarch book is well, just not a good book about how the Anarchs work and point to the revised book, or the V20 book.

    I can acknowledge that V5 is a good game, if it fits what you want out of Vampire. I can even acknowledge that the book looks good, though I liked the old (I mean mostly the revised) design a lot more and I'm not really a personal fan of most of the V5 design elements. But I can see why others like it. I still maintain my oppinion that all in all, it's not a good corebook and the revised one was a much superb introductory material to the game.


    We are seeing it in the long term, already. Companies are buying up the licenses for Vampire, and now Werewolf too.
    I doubt that's because of the stellar success of V5.More like the IP is back on the map, Bloodlines 2 is happening and lots of people want a share of this.


    These companies have plans for the lines and in the case of Vampire at least, it’s selling and it’s here to stay for at least a few years to come.
    "NWoD" is still around. D&D 4 was around for quite a few years. The 20ths showed there is at least as much demand for the old setting than for the new. D&D 5 is a massive success while being a totally unimaginitive, but well-presented and marketed, accessible nostalgia edition, that discarded most of 4e. Shadowrun 5e had thrown out a lot of stuff 4e did too. Sure V5 will be there for 4-6 years at least. Then, who knows?


    Vampire 1st edition was divisive and controversial - and that is part of what made it successful. V5 is keeping with tradition in that sense.
    Oh, come on! You're kidding right? V1 was controversial culturally and within the bigger gaming scene. V5 is divisive and cotnroversial within the existing WoD fanbase.


    If you don’t like it, or W5 or any prospective M5 - nobody is going to force you to buy it,
    And I won't. Nor my group(s). Or most of the Hungarian scene as far as I can tell.


    and nobody is going to burn your old books.
    Yeah, but I and others like me won't get any new books either. Well, there's some really good stuff on the ST's Vault, sure, but I never thought I'd be this cold toward new WoD books coming out, ever and it's sad.


    Leave a comment:


  • Trippy
    replied
    Originally posted by PMárk View Post

    Like I sadi, It's VtM. We'll see it long-term.
    It’s funny - when you talk to different groups. Most non-Vampire fans didn’t think WoD mattered anymore, before it started making the charts again with V5.


    Never doubted that. However, if their direction goes against a big portion of the fanbase's preferences, I think that's a reason enough to reconsider, even if you specifically think that it is the very best version ever existed.
    It goes against some fans’ preferences on this site - which is a tiny proportion of the overall fanbase.

    Let's be honest, that means the licencers could do stuff, but only in the confines of the material WW/Paradox allows and the direction they provide. They must control it, for keeping the brand unified. Which means nobody would stray that far from the core direction.
    Yes - but the people creatively directing it, and then being approved, are Matthew Dawkins and co.

    Nevertheless, I stay by what I said earlier, ultimately, it doesn't matter. V5 likely won't change it's direction that much, it won't contradict the corebook on the things I and many of us don't like. Those books might reconcile some of it, like making the purge of London making sense in the chronicle book and providing a future plotline regarding the city. Cult of the Blood Gods might be intersting, but doesn't change the fact that I don't like what they did with many of the clans, or that I fudamentally dislike V5's presentation of the main sects.
    Well, again, don’t buy it. Do accept, however, that if you’re not buying it, then ultimately your view of it doesn’t matter because your aren’t in the know about how it continues to be developed.

    That's a bit of a stretch. Most of V5's main direction and ideas were decided when WW got bought by Paradox. Matthew came on board later. V5 mentions things from V5 in very few places and most of the V20 material was ignored. Sorry, we could argue back and forth till the sun dies, but I won't call V5 "continuation", as i refuse to call the post-Spellplague FR the continuation of the 3e FR. At best, it was built on it and used some things from it, but in my eyes it's a different thing.
    Matthew Dawkins was on board from the start. His Beckett’s Diary book was a segue towards the V5 changes and he was one of the writers of V5. He remains the creative developer of the supplements that follow.

    V5 being an evolution of V20, see above. To me, it more like a rewrite "based on". And no, i don't think V5 will fundamentally change. Maybe the next edition will be different, but V5 will likely remain on the rails it was set onto at the beginning.
    Well, you are wrong on both counts. The meta plot was developed to segue between editions, and the point of reference to the Player’s Guide is it is explicitly a book about changing the setting and themes to your own tastes.

    Not sure, would appreciate a link. However, I read the thread about what they're planning and it seemed pretty clear that they won't diverge much from the set course. It'll be more like providing more material for the existing one. More predator types, for example, but not alternate morality system. That's what I'm saying.
    I don’t think they’ve mentioned much about Predator types just yet, and I think they are checking on whether they can include all the additional Clans in one place at the moment, but here’s the blurb:

    V5 Players Guide – A guide to playing different styles of Vampire: The Masquerade to help you play the way YOU want to play, from gritty street level drama to romantic blood opera, complete with advice, new rules, and guidance on using the 5th Edition system to play previous editions of Vampire..

    Leave a comment:


  • Trippy
    replied
    Originally posted by PMárk View Post

    There's a fundamental difference in how we see a new edition as worthwhile there. On your account, neither the editions between V1 and V5 worth doing, because they weren't changing the setting and system as radically.
    That doesn’t follow at all. I mean how can you say that the first edition of the game was or wasn’t changing the setting and system radically.....from what exactly?! It was the first edition of the game! So I’m not sure what point you are trying to make here.

    We have to agree to disagree on this. You might be right on that with V20, which was mostly a mechanical compilation, but for W20, M20, or C20? I'd say they are quite good at presenting the game and giving enough help to start playing.

    That aside, I'll retain my oppinion: the Revised corebook for Vampire were a much better corebook, gave a better grasp on the setting and still contained more options and information than V5, while not overwhelming the new reader by any means. I was a new reader too, back then and it was my first WoD corebook and it was really good at it. V5, I feel, it unnecessarily long, rife with flowery speech which is flavorful, but not that informative (and that's true for the sect books too). The use of space is bad and it's still much more restrictive than the revised core, in terms of setting elements, history and player options. In short, it's quite long, but contains less info. Talks a lot, but does a worse job actually presenting the setting and teaching the game, than the REvised core. But that's my oppinion.
    We can agree to disagree, but speaking as somebody who remembers and still owns the 1st editions of all the original WoD games, I think that V5 is the best realization of concepts and themes that were always in the game - and everything about the design augments this. It’s probably the case that a lot of what you like in previous editions, I regard as fluff and extrapolations that detract from the core concepts. And I disagree that it does a bad job of presenting the setting and teaching the game - from the practical experience of doing so with it.


    Yeah, some people like it, some people don't. 'twas the same with D&D 4e and post-Spellplague FR, or NWoD, or currently, Shadowrun 6e. We'll see it long-term. Also, I don't doubt it could and will carve out its own audience, sure. But it could do a lot better, probably, if not alienating a good portion of the existing audience.
    We are seeing it in the long term, already. Companies are buying up the licenses for Vampire, and now Werewolf too. These companies have plans for the lines and in the case of Vampire at least, it’s selling and it’s here to stay for at least a few years to come.

    I'm not Brucatto-or-bust. For example, the Revised tradbook made the Hollow Ones into my favorite group, while I didn't really felt anything positive toward them based on what he wrote for them during 2e or since then. Yes, a new eye and perspective and a spin on existin things could totally be a positive change. As long as that doesn't go too far and basically re-writes the existing stuff to the extent it hardly resembles the original. I know you and others don't feel like that about V5. I do and many do. At best, it's divisive and controversial. I'd rather not have M5 and W5 being like that too, but they likely will.
    Vampire 1st edition was divisive and controversial - and that is part of what made it successful. V5 is keeping with tradition in that sense. If you don’t like it, or W5 or any prospective M5 - nobody is going to force you to buy it, and nobody is going to burn your old books.

    Leave a comment:


  • PMárk
    replied
    Originally posted by Trippy View Post
    ICv2. The published retail sales figures. It’s also a point that the basic reason why Modiphius decided to buy the license and keep V5 going after White Wolf were dissolved, was because it was their best selling title. That is, it sold more than Star Trek or Conan or anything else on their books.
    Like I sadi, It's VtM. We'll see it long-term.


    Well, I think they do hold it dear, but what somebody else holds dear may not be the same thing as yourself. I mean, I’m passionate about World of Darkness games as well, but I clearly don’t agree with your preferences. Case in point.
    Never doubted that. However, if their direction goes against a big portion of the fanbase's preferences, I think that's a reason enough to reconsider, even if you specifically think that it is the very best version ever existed.

    Nope. He’s written for all of them - and is the creative developer of all the recent books, including the Modiphius books. Going on Fall of London, Chicago by Night and Cults of the Blood Gods, it’s apparent that the companies are working very closely on all these titles. Paradox just does brand management, although they do have executive control.
    Let's be honest, that means the licencers could do stuff, but only in the confines of the material WW/Paradox allows and the direction they provide. They must control it, for keeping the brand unified. Which means nobody would stray that far from the core direction.

    Nevertheless, I stay by what I said earlier, ultimately, it doesn't matter. V5 likely won't change it's direction that much, it won't contradict the corebook on the things I and many of us don't like. Those books might reconcile some of it, like making the purge of London making sense in the chronicle book and providing a future plotline regarding the city. Cult of the Blood Gods might be intersting, but doesn't change the fact that I don't like what they did with many of the clans, or that I fudamentally dislike V5's presentation of the main sects.

    It does matter, because the point being that V5 is extended from the material from V20 and previous editions, and there is a continuity of writers and development.
    That's a bit of a stretch. Most of V5's main direction and ideas were decided when WW got bought by Paradox. Matthew came on board later. V5 mentions things from V5 in very few places and most of the V20 material was ignored. Sorry, we could argue back and forth till the sun dies, but I won't call V5 "continuation", as i refuse to call the post-Spellplague FR the continuation of the 3e FR. At best, it was built on it and used some things from it, but in my eyes it's a different thing.

    So, you criticise the idea that V5 has changed from V20, even though it’s an evolution from V20, and don’t think V5 can change?
    V5 being an evolution of V20, see above. To me, it more like a rewrite "based on". And no, i don't think V5 will fundamentally change. Maybe the next edition will be different, but V5 will likely remain on the rails it was set onto at the beginning.


    Like I say, interesting - have you read the blurb of the upcoming Player’s Guide?
    Not sure, would appreciate a link. However, I read the thread about what they're planning and it seemed pretty clear that they won't diverge much from the set course. It'll be more like providing more material for the existing one. More predator types, for example, but not alternate morality system. That's what I'm saying.




    Leave a comment:


  • PMárk
    replied
    Originally posted by Trippy View Post
    There is going to be more stuff for M20 and, at the risk of repeating myself unnecessarily, we don’t even know if M5 will ever exist. However, if it’s worth doing a new edition it will because it will be doing something new - not just continuing the old.
    There's a fundamental difference in how we see a new edition as worthwhile there. On your account, neither the editions between V1 and V5 worth doing, because they weren't changing the setting and system as radically. Pathfinder wasn't worth doing. Most editions of CoC, or Shadowrun weren't either.

    But that's utlimately a fallacy. Neither of those did "just the same". They just weren't radically different, instead they developed the rules and setting step-by-step. Funnily, most games and settings did that. The editions and games that didn't, like NWoD, or D&D 4e usually got much heat for it.

    It’s not just about page count, it’s about having a clear direction of how to play it. The 20th Anniversary books were like ‘Greatest Hits’ albums, but V5 was like a classic album remastered.
    We have to agree to disagree on this. You might be right on that with V20, which was mostly a mechanical compilation, but for W20, M20, or C20? I'd say they are quite good at presenting the game and giving enough help to start playing.

    That aside, I'll retain my oppinion: the Revised corebook for Vampire were a much better corebook, gave a better grasp on the setting and still contained more options and information than V5, while not overwhelming the new reader by any means. I was a new reader too, back then and it was my first WoD corebook and it was really good at it. V5, I feel, it unnecessarily long, rife with flowery speech which is flavorful, but not that informative (and that's true for the sect books too). The use of space is bad and it's still much more restrictive than the revised core, in terms of setting elements, history and player options. In short, it's quite long, but contains less info. Talks a lot, but does a worse job actually presenting the setting and teaching the game, than the REvised core. But that's my oppinion.


    It has everything to do with communicating to a targeted audience, which may or may not be you. V5 made changes, for sure, but there is continuity with the older editions and a through line story. For a particular audience - and don’t forget this is selling well - the changes in emphasis were well developed and appropriate.
    Yeah, some people like it, some people don't. 'twas the same with D&D 4e and post-Spellplague FR, or NWoD, or currently, Shadowrun 6e. We'll see it long-term. Also, I don't doubt it could and will carve out its own audience, sure. But it could do a lot better, probably, if not alienating a good portion of the existing audience.


    Which is true. But my feeling, as others have expressed here, is that any new game (and we are talking at least a few years away from now) could be refreshed with a new voice and perspective on the game. Mage is not just Brucato’s vision - it’s bigger than that.
    I'm not Brucatto-or-bust. For example, the Revised tradbook made the Hollow Ones into my favorite group, while I didn't really felt anything positive toward them based on what he wrote for them during 2e or since then. Yes, a new eye and perspective and a spin on existin things could totally be a positive change. As long as that doesn't go too far and basically re-writes the existing stuff to the extent it hardly resembles the original. I know you and others don't feel like that about V5. I do and many do. At best, it's divisive and controversial. I'd rather not have M5 and W5 being like that too, but they likely will.


    Leave a comment:


  • Trippy
    replied
    Originally posted by PMárk View Post
    Where did you get that data from?
    ICv2. The published retail sales figures. It’s also a point that the basic reason why Modiphius decided to buy the license and keep V5 going after White Wolf were dissolved, was because it was their best selling title. That is, it sold more than Star Trek or Conan or anything else on their books.


    I disagree. I'm not capitalist enough to think a new owner of a long-standing IP don't have any responsibility to preserve something countless people hold dear worldwide. Moreover, yes, if the new people they target outweighs the people they'll turn off, that might be justified monetically, but it's a big gamble that tends to end badly. Actually, we have a lot more examples it went wrong than not.
    Well, I think they do hold it dear, but what somebody else holds dear may not be the same thing as yourself. I mean, I’m passionate about World of Darkness games as well, but I clearly don’t agree with your preferences. Case in point.

    The last I heard, he declined WW but continued working on licensed products with OPP. Did that change? Did Paradox employed him or Modiphius (the official main licenser) hired him? Or he's "just" the creative developer of V5 books within OPP?
    Nope. He’s written for all of them - and is the creative developer of all the recent books, including the Modiphius books. Going on Fall of London, Chicago by Night and Cults of the Blood Gods, it’s apparent that the companies are working very closely on all these titles. Paradox just does brand management, although they do have executive control.

    Ultimately, it doesn't matter, who it is. As I've said, I don't have personal problems with any of the WW folks. Naturally, V5 wasn't just "Martin's fault", or anything like that. For Matthew, I liked most of what he wrote and developed for V20. I really liked BJD and would be much more happy if V5 would have built the plot and setting more on that and the other V20 books. However, for example, Matthew wrote the V5 Brujah clan writeup in the corebook and I didn't really like that, despite the Brujah being one of my all-time favorite clans. I also had several polite disagreements over stuff in V5 with him here and on FB. I don't know how much he likes the V5 direction really, how much influence he had in the core, or how he tries to reconcile some of the sorest points in the newer books. Maybe it's the later, maybe he enjoys rethinking VtM too, or both. I wouldn't blame him for any of that, I get the creative angle of it.
    It does matter, because the point being that V5 is extended from the material from V20 and previous editions, and there is a continuity of writers and development.

    Point is: even if he's the lead creative dev, I don't think the core direction of V5 will change, or that W5 or M5 will be much different.
    So, you criticise the idea that V5 has changed from V20, even though it’s an evolution from V20, and don’t think V5 can change? Like I say, interesting - have you read the blurb of the upcoming Player’s Guide? This is what they are aiming to let players do. W5 will be seen next year, and we don’t know if M5 will ever exist as of yet.
    Last edited by Trippy; 12-19-2019, 01:15 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • PMárk
    replied
    Originally posted by Trippy View Post
    It transpires that CoC7E’s biggest market is in Japan, as a purely irrelevant aside.
    Hmm, didn't know that, interesting.

    V5 outsold it last year.
    Where did you get that data from? Anyway, I wouldn't be surprised. It was the new edition of VtM, on the shelves. People were excited and curious naturally. It was reviewed on sites and blogs and channels that didn't follow at all anything OPP put out and weren't focused on WoD in the least. Requiem sold quite well too, at the beginning. We'll see it long-term. Sure, it'll have (already has) a fanbase just like Requiem does, but I doubt it'll outsell PF2e, or CoC, or Shadowrun 6e this year. Or Cyberpunk RED. I won't even mention anything WotC will put out, that would be just plain unfair.

    If it means they are satisfying their own market it does. They don’t own anybody any favours when they have creative control - they merely have to make it worth it on their own terms.
    I disagree. I'm not capitalist enough to think a new owner of a long-standing IP don't have any responsibility to preserve something countless people hold dear worldwide. Moreover, yes, if the new people they target outweighs the people they'll turn off, that might be justified monetically, but it's a big gamble that tends to end badly. Actually, we have a lot more examples it went wrong than not.

    Well, to answer the first question for you - V5, currently, the creative developer has been Matthew Dawkins. What don’t you like about Matthew Dawkins’ direction?
    The last I heard, he declined WW but continued working on licensed products with OPP. Did that change? Did Paradox employed him or Modiphius (the official main licenser) hired him? Or he's "just" the creative developer of V5 books within OPP?

    Ultimately, it doesn't matter, who it is. As I've said, I don't have personal problems with any of the WW folks. Naturally, V5 wasn't just "Martin's fault", or anything like that. For Matthew, I liked most of what he wrote and developed for V20. I really liked BJD and would be much more happy if V5 would have built the plot and setting more on that and the other V20 books. However, for example, Matthew wrote the V5 Brujah clan writeup in the corebook and I didn't really like that, despite the Brujah being one of my all-time favorite clans. I also had several polite disagreements over stuff in V5 with him here and on FB. I don't know how much he likes the V5 direction really, how much influence he had in the core, or how he tries to reconcile some of the sorest points in the newer books. Maybe it's the later, maybe he enjoys rethinking VtM too, or both. I wouldn't blame him for any of that, I get the creative angle of it.

    As for specific examples, I don't think going through that lengthy list would be productive. It was talked to death many times in many threads.

    Point is: even if he's the lead creative dev, I don't think the core direction of V5 will change, or that W5 or M5 will be much different.



    Leave a comment:


  • Trippy
    replied
    Originally posted by MyWifeIsScary View Post
    I.... Uh...
    I'm speechless.

    Very well sir. You've won this argument. I cannot reason yourself out of a point you did not reason yourself into.
    Again, you’re just being obnoxious. You have nothing worthwhile to say. V5 is a lot better than anything you have ever done - and you have clearly expressed that you do not understand the game or the appeal it has. I hope you avoid any future M5 if it causes you physical pain.
    Last edited by Trippy; 12-19-2019, 12:42 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • MyWifeIsScary
    replied
    Originally posted by Trippy View Post
    It’s not just about page count, it’s about having a clear direction of how to play it. The 20th Anniversary books were like ‘Greatest Hits’ albums, but V5 was like a classic album remastered.
    I.... Uh...
    I'm speechless.

    Very well sir. You've won this argument. I cannot reason yourself out of a point you did not reason yourself into.

    Leave a comment:


  • MyWifeIsScary
    replied
    Having a lot of sales doesn't necessarily make a product good. For example The New Star Wars films are getting by on brand recognition alone. Monopoly is a best selling game despite near universal loathing. Coca-Cola consistently performs worse than pepsi in taste tests, but still out performs in sales.
    You've shelled out cash on V5, and people tend to get defensive about purchases, so maybe you're more reluctant to accept how shit it.


    Ha.
    I don't know MD that well so I can't speak what he'd do, but given that his sections of LotB were the good ones... he doesn't really mesh with v5. I mean I get that reciving benefits through specific blood types might've been his idea, but most everything else I've read v5 doesn't really strike me as his. It's too late now anyway. The Die has been cast. The corebook is dreadful, the supplements matter not. The Next V5 book can be utter poetry and so long as it doesn't eradicate everything established so far it won't make V5 any more workable.

    Leave a comment:


  • Trippy
    replied
    Originally posted by PMárk View Post

    It's not abut being afraid. You could see it two ways:

    1. I already have enough of this stuff, I'd like to see something new/different/new take on the same thing.
    2. I like this thing and I'd like to see more stuff for it, with advanced setting and better mechanics, but ultimately, I want this thing.

    Both are valid, but neither are a necessity. Moreover, fans tend to like the things they like because they are the way they are, so you'll naturally anger a lot of them with the first. On the other hand, new prospective buyers don't have any preconceptions about the game, so, they don't need the thing to change wildly, they just need a good presentation and accessability (pointing back to the D&D 5e example).
    There is going to be more stuff for M20 and, at the risk of repeating myself unnecessarily, we don’t even know if M5 will ever exist. However, if it’s worth doing a new edition it will because it will be doing something new - not just continuing the old.

    As for M20 being too big and all-encompassing: true. It's hard for a totally new fan, to start with, just due to sheer size and density of stuff (but it gives you much, if you take your time). On the other hand, the same was said about V20, in comparison to V5. Funny thing is, V5 is much closer to V20 in terms of length, than to the earlier corebooks, while containing far less actual information. People complained about the "green marble wall", but the corebook was, in truth, a pretty good starting point.
    It’s not just about page count, it’s about having a clear direction of how to play it. The 20th Anniversary books were like ‘Greatest Hits’ albums, but V5 was like a classic album remastered.

    However, all that is only about slimming down things to a reasonable corebook from a compilatory tome M20 was. It has nothing to do with sweeping changes to the game and setting.
    It has everything to do with communicating to a targeted audience, which may or may not be you. V5 made changes, for sure, but there is continuity with the older editions and a through line story. For a particular audience - and don’t forget this is selling well - the changes in emphasis were well developed and appropriate.

    As for not everyone liking Brucatto's style: that's true for any of the writers. I had some very eye-rolling moments, when reading V5. Or VtR 2e, for that matter. I felt they're just trying too hard. I also loathed the contempt some of the revised writers had toward players and styles they deemed "inappropriate" (which was quite hipocritical IMO, when the game and story had plenty of stuff for and like that). I don't like every last piece Brucatto wrote and he has a tendency to go into long purple speech with symbolism, which is appropriate, but yeah, could be a bit much for some. On the other hand, I like most of what he wrote for M20 and I like the plotline there and most of the mechanical changes so yeah, I'd call him a good candidate, as M20 was mostly acclaimed among the fanbase. Not without controversies and arguments, but all-in-all positively regarded and accepted.
    Which is true. But my feeling, as others have expressed here, is that any new game (and we are talking at least a few years away from now) could be refreshed with a new voice and perspective on the game. Mage is not just Brucato’s vision - it’s bigger than that.

    Leave a comment:


  • PMárk
    replied
    Originally posted by Trippy View Post

    Look, I own a signed Quintessential edition of M20. I was one of the biggest backers of that book, and actually Patreon’d Brucato as an independent writer for a while. I’m happy with M20, as I am with all the other editions of the game I own and have followed since 1993.

    But I’m not afraid of new directions, whatever they may be.
    It's not abut being afraid. You could see it two ways:

    1. I already have enough of this stuff, I'd like to see something new/different/new take on the same thing.
    2. I like this thing and I'd like to see more stuff for it, with advanced setting and better mechanics, but ultimately, I want this thing.

    Both are valid, but neither are a necessity. Moreover, fans tend to like the things they like because they are the way they are, so you'll naturally anger a lot of them with the first. On the other hand, new prospective buyers don't have any preconceptions about the game, so, they don't need the thing to change wildly, they just need a good presentation and accessability (pointing back to the D&D 5e example).


    As a criticism of M20, I’d say that there is a significantly wide spread view that the book itself is too big - practically speaking - and has a scope that is difficult to follow. Brucato himself has a distinctive writing style that not everybody likes, while certain terms in the game could be better defined. There are setting-based decisions that could be reviewed and certain concepts could be given greater emphasis. As with all the 20th Anniversary lines, it’s very much a catalogue of collated material - and again, that is not to everybody’s taste. Some people want a more driven game, that has focussed themes to play on. Even then, this is all just speculative talk because we don’t even know if there ever will be a new edition. But what is to fear from discussing it?
    As for M20 being too big and all-encompassing: true. It's hard for a totally new fan, to start with, just due to sheer size and density of stuff (but it gives you much, if you take your time). On the other hand, the same was said about V20, in comparison to V5. Funny thing is, V5 is much closer to V20 in terms of length, than to the earlier corebooks, while containing far less actual information. People complained about the "green marble wall", but the corebook was, in truth, a pretty good starting point.

    In general, I believe the Revised corebooks were pretty good, well, corebooks. They were short, had distinct themes, a good grasp on the basics of the setting and gave you everything you needed to start playing.

    However, all that is only about slimming down things to a reasonable corebook from a compilatory tome M20 was. It has nothing to do with sweeping changes to the game and setting.

    As for not everyone liking Brucatto's style: that's true for any of the writers. I had some very eye-rolling moments, when reading V5. Or VtR 2e, for that matter. I felt they're just trying too hard. I also loathed the contempt some of the revised writers had toward players and styles they deemed "inappropriate" (which was quite hipocritical IMO, when the game and story had plenty of stuff for and like that). I don't like every last piece Brucatto wrote and he has a tendency to go into long purple speech with symbolism, which is appropriate, but yeah, could be a bit much for some. On the other hand, I like most of what he wrote for M20 and I like the plotline there and most of the mechanical changes so yeah, I'd call him a good candidate, as M20 was mostly acclaimed among the fanbase. Not without controversies and arguments, but all-in-all positively regarded and accepted.

    Leave a comment:


  • Trippy
    replied
    Originally posted by PMárk View Post
    And they do. CoC 7e is doing quite well, I believe. CofD has its market, the 20ths had their market, V5 has its market.
    It transpires that CoC7E’s biggest market is in Japan, as a purely irrelevant aside. V5 outsold it last year.

    The owner of the IP does whatever they want with it, yes. But that doesn't necessiate alienating a good portion of the existing fans.
    If it means they are satisfying their own market it does. They don’t own anybody any favours when they have creative control - they merely have to make it worth it on their own terms.

    On a personal level? I don't have problems with them. They are fine folks, I agreed with many things they said during the development and was hyped about V5. I defended them on these boards frequently. It's just, when it came to the details of the final product, their vision and mine doesn't match and since the general direction any licenser will have to follow still comes from them... Based on V5 and what we know about W5, I don't think Mage will be an exception, due to some miracle.

    As for who is the most influential right now? I don't know. Paradox clearly pulled back Martin and co. from the forefront, due to all the backlash, but I think it's still their core team, who gives the "setting bible", the mentioned general direction to the licencers.
    Well, to answer the first question for you - V5, currently, the creative developer has been Matthew Dawkins. What don’t you like about Matthew Dawkins’ direction?
    Last edited by Trippy; 12-19-2019, 12:05 PM.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X