Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Does Hunter need to be an independent line?

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

  • Live Bait
    started a topic Does Hunter need to be an independent line?

    Does Hunter need to be an independent line?

    Hear me out. Since hunters are basically humans they probably use the first few chapters of CofD unmodified (they will need most non supernatural merits plus some of their own, a expanded antagonist section and none of the GM stuff) and that page count could instead be given over to new stuff which I think is sorely needed to do justice to everything H:TV adds to a core mortal game.
    I know this is somewhat true of any CofD line but with Hunter it's even more true.
    Basically would you accept requiring a second book if all the space saved was extra content?

  • Sith_Happens
    replied
    However much Hunter did or didn’t deserve its own cover color before it’s pretty clear it’s being made to deserve it now. Blue Core very firmly plays on the occult detective and classic supernatural horror genres which are very much not what Hunter is even before accounting for Hunter getting the same refocus-and-flesh-out-the-themes treatment as the other second editions.

    Leave a comment:


  • Morty
    replied
    Hunter has always been an odd duck among the main splats because of its position in the larger world. When I run a Vampire game, the existence and nature of mages is only as relevant as I and my players make it to be. Do they exist? Are they Awakened or some kind of witches? Or maybe both? Unless I consciously decide to make it an issue, or one of my players does (like via a backstory involving one), it doesn't matter. But hunters are mortal, and mortals are always going to be around and wind up on the bad side of supernatural activities.

    Leave a comment:


  • ArcaneArts
    replied
    Originally posted by LostLight View Post
    Care to expand?
    When I've got the time to(God I keep saying that).

    Leave a comment:


  • Live Bait
    replied
    Thanks for the great responses, I want to clarify that I ment no disrespect to the hunter line with my proposal and realise that Onyx Path is unlikely to deviate from their current method for one line given that this is how they've chosen to do 2e.
    ArcaneArts it's been great having an inside prospective on this, thank you for participating.

    Leave a comment:


  • LostLight
    replied
    Originally posted by ArcaneArts View Post
    Hoo boy is that missing a lot of actual difference.
    Care to expand?

    Leave a comment:


  • ArcaneArts
    replied
    Originally posted by LostLight View Post
    In the end, the only difference in 1e between a supplement and a gameline is how much depth and development were given to the splat- blue books were self contained, sometimes referenced by other books but rarely with additional books giving further development of the concepts in question.
    Hoo boy is that missing a lot of actual difference.

    Leave a comment:


  • LostLight
    replied
    In the end, the only difference in 1e between a supplement and a gameline is how much depth and development were given to the splat- blue books were self contained, sometimes referenced by other books but rarely with additional books giving further development of the concepts in question. Gamelines (other than Geist) were when there was meant to be a series of books exploring different concepts and adding to them. Again, there are exceptions (again, Geist, and Armory), but that's was the core difference.

    Now, using some sort of a Night Horrors format may have been interesting, and that is kinda what the "specialist" book are- even though they come from Hunter's point of view instead of the hunted, mechanics included. And yes, the all "Hunter vs mortal" thing has brought its share of issues. However, if I;m not mistaken the idea of Night Horrors came kinda late at 1e, and until then it made more sense that if you plan for a series of books, gameline would be the better format. May main question is still what exactly we would have gained from making Hunter a supplement instead of a line- 1e didn't "wasted space" on core materials, 2e always "waste". With the new core absorbing many of Hunter's ideas and concepts, I do agree that differentiating Hunter from a mortal game is the new edition's greatest challenge, but it looks like the people who work on it are aware of the it and work on it.

    In short, it is hard for me to see how different Hunter would have been if it was only a supplement/ a cross gameline supplement series, other than the fact it would have had potentially less books and material about it- so in short, yeah, I'm happy it is a gameline, and I'm not sure what the benefit would be.

    Leave a comment:


  • ArcaneArts
    replied
    Originally posted by Primordial newcomer View Post
    Well we will see what 2nd edition hunter brings to the table. Personally if making it a blue book supplement would still keep the conspiracies and compacts (along with endowments), I would be ok with the idea
    I mean, at this point I wouldn't mess with the brand. Problems as a main gameline may exist, but at this point it has built and sold itself on those grounds, and a rebranding would hurt more than help.

    Leave a comment:


  • Primordial newcomer
    replied
    Well we will see what 2nd edition hunter brings to the table. Personally if making it a blue book supplement would still keep the conspiracies and compacts (along with endowments), I would be ok with the idea

    Leave a comment:


  • ArcaneArts
    replied
    Originally posted by Morty View Post

    I'm not familiar with Night Horrors or how the audience reacted to it, so I can't really say how it compares to Hunter. Vigil is definitely different than other gamelines in that its protagonists are ultimately mortal, except maybe with some extra bits. The difference between a core book mortal character and a tier one hunter is blurry. So there's some grounds for being treated differently, but I don't know if it's worth the risk. As barren as this section of the forum is, Night Horrors don't have one, do they?
    There's some truth in this, but the catch of the matters comes to sales-dialogue is only so important as it translates into putting the money down, and while Night Horrors doesn't have a forum, for years it was a big deal when a gameline got a Night Horrors book, with instant surge in response to it. Hell, I make it sound like it's fallen out of order, but Conquering Heroes and Enemy Action basically had each of the fan bases get more whipped up than simply the BPG or DSG, and that's because of the effect the Night Horrors brand has had on people as a result of the quality and nature of the content when it started. Arguably The Tormented, Shunned by the Moon, and The Nameless and the Accursed haven't hit as hard of a reaction as the two mentioned above, but by and large that's because conversation in general has cooled a little bit for Chronicles overall, and might be influenced by the fact that those books are stepping in as 2E antagonist books, but even still the way a lot of people reacted to those three has still been "NIGHT HORRORS, FUCK YEAH" above many others (Nameless and Accursed still got more of a response than Signs of Sorcery, and people wanted Signs of Sorcery like whoa).

    Now contrasting this, as you mentioned, the difference between mortal investigators and hunters is very blurry, and largely that's because there shouldn't be one-but there is because Hunter is a gameline instead of a Blue Book sourcebook (set), and with that things have to be presented and built A Certain Way, and this has led to a lot of hang-ups both mechanically and in keeping control of the conversation, with some of the larger issues of understanding and working with and playing Hunter stemming from that brand choice.

    Now, Hunter has done well despite that, no denying that-as I mentioned, at this point those issues are more "Challenge Accepted" that Problems. But it has been something that has kept Hunter from being as strong a product as it could be, and I'm not going to deny that.
    Last edited by ArcaneArts; 05-17-2019, 05:45 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Morty
    replied
    Originally posted by ArcaneArts View Post
    Given how the Night Horrors branding as a cross-gameline sub-franchise has worked out and has become widely regard as an instantly recognizable and favorite brand for a lot of people?

    I mean, I get it, but I don't think it would have to be consigned to that fate. It would largely be dependent on the branding and marketing strategy.

    (Now admittedly the way it turned out was how they decided to deal with the Hunter brand and that Mostly Worked Out, but as mentioned it also Created Problems that are still at work in dealing with property and audience expectations and the dissonance between the two, and between Hunter and Night Horrors I think there's precedence for a Better Third Option.)
    I'm not familiar with Night Horrors or how the audience reacted to it, so I can't really say how it compares to Hunter. Vigil is definitely different than other gamelines in that its protagonists are ultimately mortal, except maybe with some extra bits. The difference between a core book mortal character and a tier one hunter is blurry. So there's some grounds for being treated differently, but I don't know if it's worth the risk. As barren as this section of the forum is, Night Horrors don't have one, do they?

    Leave a comment:


  • ArcaneArts
    replied
    Originally posted by Morty View Post
    Would it be more efficient? Perhaps. But it'd also make people dismiss Hunter as not a "real" gameline and less relevant than the others. I don't think that'd be worth it.
    Given how the Night Horrors branding as a cross-gameline sub-franchise has worked out and has become widely regard as an instantly recognizable and favorite brand for a lot of people?

    I mean, I get it, but I don't think it would have to be consigned to that fate. It would largely be dependent on the branding and marketing strategy.

    (Now admittedly the way it turned out was how they decided to deal with the Hunter brand and that Mostly Worked Out, but as mentioned it also Created Problems that are still at work in dealing with property and audience expectations and the dissonance between the two, and between Hunter and Night Horrors I think there's precedence for a Better Third Option.)
    Last edited by ArcaneArts; 05-17-2019, 05:02 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Morty
    replied
    Would it be more efficient? Perhaps. But it'd also make people dismiss Hunter as not a "real" gameline and less relevant than the others. I don't think that'd be worth it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Tessie
    replied
    Definitely. The only major thing missing from the CofD book to play a hunter would be ready made Compacts and Conspiracies, and they're not actually that important for those who prefer first tier games.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X