FantasyCraft not stand-alone?!

[Goodlun]

I was oblivious during all of this history...
However FC core book is a stand alone game with massive flexibility and options. The core book could easily support almost any fantasy setting indefinately. All other releases will just be cream.
This isn't a off the cuff fanboy rant. I've been in the hobby almost three decades and IMO FC core book is easily in the top 10% of games.

I completely agree I have made more use of my Fantasy Craft book than I one of my 3.5 books and I have plenty of splat books to choice from as they where cheap to pick up when 4th was announced.  While I only have 2 decades of playing experience I have quite the library and FC is certainly at the top of the heat and that is only with one book.  I will be picking up the other 2 when hard bounds become available, but the core book certainly rises to the occasion just fine I could certainly use it as my only fantasy tool kit for years to come.

[Psion]

I was oblivious during all of this history...
However FC core book is a stand alone game with massive flexibility and options. The core book could easily support almost any fantasy setting indefinately. All other releases will just be cream.
This isn't a off the cuff fanboy rant. I've been in the hobby almost three decades and IMO FC core book is easily in the top 10% of games.

I generally concur. I do sort of see where jolt is coming from, because if there is one thing about Fantasy Craft I'd like to see improved, it's the flavor and "fine-honing" of magic characters, and I hope that Spellbound can address that. But I've been impressed with the breadth that just the core book provides, and don't feel like I'm waiting in limbo for a stream of supplements like I do other games.

[jolt]

I was oblivious during all of this history...
However FC core book is a stand alone game with massive flexibility and options. The core book could easily support almost any fantasy setting indefinately. All other releases will just be cream.
This isn't a off the cuff fanboy rant. I've been in the hobby almost three decades and IMO FC core book is easily in the top 10% of games.

I generally concur. I do sort of see where jolt is coming from, because if there is one thing about Fantasy Craft I'd like to see improved, it's the flavor and "fine-honing" of magic characters, and I hope that Spellbound can address that. But I've been impressed with the breadth that just the core book provides, and don't feel like I'm waiting in limbo for a stream of supplements like I do other games.

If you think that waiting 3 years for Spellbound which included two start up releases (including one revision), which were then trashed, is not "waiting in limbo", then we have very different definitions of what that means.

FC is very flexible but its magic system, as it currently stands, is very bland and useful only for the most generic and typified fantasy settings.  That's the "con" of the toolkit approach.  Two of my favorite games, rpg's anyway, are Pendragon and Spirit of the Century.  Both of those games are very narrowly focused which is the "con" of the dedicated approach; if you aren't interested in that approach, that game is completely useless to you.  If I want to play Arthurian Legend, I'm going to play Pendragon, not FC (nor any other toolkit/generic system; GURP's, Hero System, whatever).  Because FC (and those other systems) can't do what Pendragon does.  I could certainly use FC to create a game with a similiar style to Arthurian legend, but it wouldn't feel like Mallory or T.H. White because it isn't designed to.  That isn't necessarily a flaw, depending on what you're looking for, but it does highlight the difference between a game dedicated to one thing versus a more open-ended system.  For me, if I see a dedicated approach that appeals to me, I'm always going to select that over a toolkit approach.

When I see a toolkit game, the first thing I ask myself is what does this give me or do for me that I don't already have or can't do.  Right now, for me, all FC is is a D&D alternative, because, IMO, it does D&D better than D&D currently does.  It's the best, IMO, OGL game out there.  Which is great if I want an OGL game.  But right now there is no OGL game that cracks my top 20 favorite rpg's let alone my top 10.  If FC makes that list for you then great but you have my pity as you must have been in gaming hell from the mid '70's through 2000.

And just as a clarification: in my previous post, every line in that last paragraph refrerred to a different game by a different company.  The first refers to Crafty but the rest aren't.  I see no reason to identify them as it has no impact on my point.

Well, I seem to have rambled on a bit.  As I'm clearly in the minority here I'll just (no doubt to everyone's relief) shut up.


jolt

[Typhon]

lol Jolt, no worries man. To each their own. If they can't take criticism, they're doomed to failure. The crafty guys seem pretty good about it (some of the fanboys, however...). All you're doing is giving an opportunity for improvement so don't sweat it. As long as you can explain yourself reasonably, I'll stick up for ya!

Personally, I've had great and horrid games in all KINDS of systems. It's always depended upon the GM (well, and the other players to a lesser extent). The magic system is a little limp but that'll get a boost soon (I've only been in this for a month or two so no 3 year downer for me....HOWEVER, I AM [not was lol] a huge fan of Game of Thrones and know a little about having to wait for the "next book" hehe, that bastard better not pull a Jordan on me!).

[Psion]

I was oblivious during all of this history...
However FC core book is a stand alone game with massive flexibility and options. The core book could easily support almost any fantasy setting indefinately. All other releases will just be cream.
This isn't a off the cuff fanboy rant. I've been in the hobby almost three decades and IMO FC core book is easily in the top 10% of games.

I generally concur. I do sort of see where jolt is coming from, because if there is one thing about Fantasy Craft I'd like to see improved, it's the flavor and "fine-honing" of magic characters, and I hope that Spellbound can address that. But I've been impressed with the breadth that just the core book provides, and don't feel like I'm waiting in limbo for a stream of supplements like I do other games.

If you think that waiting 3 years for Spellbound which included two start up releases (including one revision), which were then trashed, is not "waiting in limbo", then we have very different definitions of what that means.

In a way I do. But that was Spycraft in my mind, not FC. I was initially excited by VAO of Silence as a project, and I was disappointed to hear that was deferred until SC 3.0. Now, my interests have wandered elsewhere.

The reason I want Spellbound now is for FC, and arises from my actual play experience over the last year. And I can wait until early 11 for Spellbound. One thing that's refreshing about FC is that it doesn't need a high degree of magic to run, so the need isn't pressing for me. Just desirous.

So as for FC... no, I don't feel that way. But I do understand what you are saying.

[Falar]

FC is very flexible but its magic system, as it currently stands, is very bland and useful only for the most generic and typified fantasy settings.  That's the "con" of the toolkit approach.  Two of my favorite games, rpg's anyway, are Pendragon and Spirit of the Century.  Both of those games are very narrowly focused which is the "con" of the dedicated approach; if you aren't interested in that approach, that game is completely useless to you. 

As an aside, totally not helpful to the discussion at hand, Spirit of the Century is basically just a flavor of a generic system known as Fate RPG 3.0, which the Dresden Files RPG and Diaspora are both flavors of. So, you know, even though Spirit of the Century might not be able to do anything, the base system is able to do pretty widely differing things.

[Catodon]

I think both Typhon and Jolt have points. The only reason I'm probably not erked about waiting sooo looong for FC and then Spellcraft is because I didn't even know FC in development until after it was released. I think Typhon is right the crafty boys are grown ups and should be told when something is not up-to-scratch they can take it.
Perhaps this time you're a minority, perhaps the others of your opinion are not represented on the forum but are out still there. If you are a minority you could be right still.

P.s.
I'm still not convinced the beast upgrade for kits should be a default rule.  

[jolt]

EDIT: SHIIIIT! I hit "Modify" rather than "Reply." I am very sorry, Jolt....I think I lost your message. Most sincere apologies - no intent was made to censor you I have recovered as much as I can.  - Alex

I think my real problem is my great dissatisfaction with how the gaming industry has transmogrified over the last 10 years or so.

Look at MRQ (Master RuneQuest) from Mongoose.  They published over a dozen books for the game in less than two years before admitting, what everyone else had known since day 1, that the main book was completely borked up.  Their solution?  Scrap everything and start up with MRQ II.  That kind of attitude, IMO, sucks balls.  Unfortunately, this attitude is becoming more and more prevalent.[/quote]

My reality is determined by my age, my time to play games, my time to work on games and my finances.  It doesn't matter why a game company chooses to do whatever it's doing because my underlying reality isn't changing.  I hardly expect the entire industry paradigm to change because of my dissatisfaction but I hope companies are happy that the new gamers coming in are good enough to make up for the older/casual gamers leaving.  There's a reason that the industry has "balkanized" so much over the last decade and I wonder if the heads of companies, especially the bigger ones, have given any thought as to why.

Ugh, another too long post.  I need my beer.

[Desertpuma]

I like FC and I like the idea behind MasterCraft (even though the suddeness of the change completely screwed me up) but the "Let's switch gears" mentality of most current rpg companies is leaving a lot of older/ageing and casual gamers in the dust.

I felt the same way briefly about the MasterCraft switch, as I believe most of the long term vets on this site did, but we also knew we could trust Patrick and Alex. They had proven to us that they wanted to make the best game possible so that everyone at the table, including the GM, would have fun. So most of us, a little unhappily, rolled with the delay. As the guy in Arizona who was talking up FC at my FLGS and local RPGA chapter meetings, I got stung badly when the conversion to MC showed up.

However, I never lost faith in them because I knew they put out quality product with lots of crunch which did not leave a lot of room for fluff. They were also very candid, as much as they could afford to be, about what was going on and why. I don't know of any other game designer(s) which are so accessible to customers & fans as Crafty Games is. I'm content to wait because I know in the end it will be worth it.

[Crafty_Alex]

I think my real problem is my great dissatisfaction with how the gaming industry has transmogrified over the last 10 years or so.

Without getting too far into the somewhat sad details, I think the companies have changed because the way games are sold and the amount you can sell have changed as well. It's no secret RPGs have seen a lot of contraction in the last decade, which is only further exacerbated by a distribution network constantly on the lookout for the next Pokemon or Magic or Heroclix.

Used to be, manufacturers either sold direct to retailers or distributors were willing to buy chunks of stock and hold it to dole out over time. But then the consumable/collectable game came out and the market started to change. RPGs, not being either consumable or inexpensive, don't fly off the shelves in the same rate as these games but are held to the same standard by distributors whose primary concern is turning over stock at the fastest possible rate (they make money on sales to stores via volume). This is why d20 exploded so big and crashed so hard - suddenly, RPGs were sold as consumables, but distributors overestimated the appetite for these books, esp. considering so many of the early ones were total crap. Then ended up holding lots of crap stock and having to blow it out - those of you who go to Gencon can see the booths that are still selling d20 overstock from 2000-2003 at rock bottom prices, year after year.

Now, making games that are "new-shiny" especially ones that are getting "old" (as in, older than 3 years) is often the only way to ensure your stuff keeps being purchased by distribution, which is the only way you can get into stores. Sad, but there you are 

Look at MRQ (Master RuneQuest) from Mongoose.  They published over a dozen books for the game in less than two years before admitting, what everyone else had known since day 1, that the main book was completely borked up.  Their solution?  Scrap everything and start up with MRQ II.  That kind of attitude, IMO, sucks balls.  Unfortunately, this attitude is becoming more and more prevalent.

I agree that totally sucks. I don't think most companies want to burn their customers - we certainly don't!

My reality is determined by my age, my time to play games, my time to work on games and my finances.  It doesn't matter why a game company chooses to do whatever it's doing because my underlying reality isn't changing.  I hardly expect the entire industry paradigm to change because of my dissatisfaction but I hope companies are happy that the new gamers coming in are good enough to make up for the older/casual gamers leaving.  There's a reason that the industry has "balkanized" so much over the last decade and I wonder if the heads of companies, especially the bigger ones, have given any thought as to why.

The industry is getting tougher, for lots of reasons. We're all getting older. Video games attract gamers that might have used RPGs in the past. Shrinkage in hobby games makes distribution hostile to things that "sit" for any amount of time. Price expectations of games don't shift at the same rate it costs to produce them. Totally without hubris here, but if we were doing exactly what we're doing now, but 15 years ago, Crafty would be an aspiring big company. Nowadays it's just a different market.

Ugh, another too long post.  I need my beer.

Me too! We'll raise a glass in Vegas to ya.

[Sletchman]

When Mastercraft was first announced I was kinda pissed off, to be honest.  I'd spent forever pimping the OotS: Classic Fantasy and Light of Olympus, as well as Spycraft itself, and Fantasycraft was supposed to be an super close [at heart my group tends to prefer fantasy games].  Suddenly there was this massive delay, and we'd need to get this new system [especially when as far as I was concerned the old system was perfect], and with it being a different system my goal of running a good Shadowrun-esque game was pushed back beyond the foreseeable future [my group likes the idea of Shadowrun, but most of us hate the rules].

It actually took me a little while to realise I was repeating the same actions as a few years back - Spycraft 2.0 was announced, and I was all PO'd because my favourite system didn't need an update, and my big stack of products were perfect as is - only to have the new system be so damn good that it made the previous edition look bad.  Mastercraft so far has done this again - Fantasy Craft contains literally everything I've ever said to my group would make a cool house rule, plus a dozen more good things.

Sure, there's been some setbacks [I've been waiting for 10,000 Bullets almost as long as Alex has ] but Fantasy Craft is excellent - it really flawlessly suits my needs.  To that point that I'm juryriging modern games into what I have of the Mastercraft engine [I even used it to run a Warhammer 40k game, with zero issues].  Sure I'm jonesing for Spellbound like a crack addict in need of a fix, and I would sell my legs for Spycraft 3 and 10k Bullets, but I can wait - because I know they will fix my addiction perfectly.

The only thing I'm currently a little pensive about is one of Pat's throwaway statements in another thread that SpyCraft 3 [and likely 10k Bullets] will have more skills then FantasyCraft - which is something I really don't want to happen.  But I figure, if 2 or 3 extra skills is my biggest worry for the future of my favourite system, then my gaming life is pretty damn sweet right now, isn't it?

Wow - that was rambling, and might make zero sense.  I need to sleep more often...

[Desertpuma]

I feel your pain on the sleep, Sletchman. I also feel your pain regarding the MC switch. I'm patiently waiting for 10KB and then SC3.

The crunch wins in the end.

[Typhon]

Well honestly, my main irritation with the gaming world was the whole going D20 crap. Honestly, if you're going to do something, do it right. %s is the way to go. LOVED Rolemaster for that reason. Was so VERY nice to have fumbles range from 2% (maces I think) to 6 or 7% (flails) as opposed to a strait 5% for everything (really, that's one in twenty swings! talk about butterfingers). Not to mention the "open ended" option which made for extreme success or failure rolls. Fantastic system that's now gone over to the D20 darkside. *sigh*
I hope they at least kept the multiple different stats and the use of multiple stats (well for most) as modifiers for their skills.

[Golden Dragon]

Well honestly, my main irritation with the gaming world was the whole going D20 crap. Honestly, if you're going to do something, do it right. %s is the way to go. LOVED Rolemaster for that reason. Was so VERY nice to have fumbles range from 2% (maces I think) to 6 or 7% (flails) as opposed to a strait 5% for everything (really, that's one in twenty swings! talk about butterfingers). Not to mention the "open ended" option which made for extreme success or failure rolls. Fantastic system that's now gone over to the D20 darkside. *sigh*
I hope they at least kept the multiple different stats and the use of multiple stats (well for most) as modifiers for their skills.

As someone who enjoyed Rolemaster as extended MERP, I wish to disagree on the use of d100. Although mathematically it may look nice, at the end of the day, the "resolution" is higher than needed. 20 steps is really enough. As much as I liked the presentation, the number crunching was too much. (Not that I couldn't do it, just that it was more work than was needed.)

Sometimes, too much detail can be the enemy at the table. Where a computer can quickly handle large or complex calculations, most players can't. When Scott designed his Edge mechanics, he capped the Edge pool at 5. I think that was a great design choice. Many mass wargames use d6, because too much detail slows down the game. At some point, we need to say, "This level of detail is fine enough." I draw the line at d20. The gains for going from d20 to d100 do not justify the work.

I'm intrigued by your comment that Rolemaster has gone over to the d20 darkside. What happened? (I stopped following Rolemaster when ICE went under.) Has the new incarnation adopted d20 mechanics?

[jolt]

As someone who enjoyed Rolemaster as extended MERP, I wish to disagree on the use of d100. Although mathematically it may look nice, at the end of the day, the "resolution" is higher than needed. 20 steps is really enough. As much as I liked the presentation, the number crunching was too much. (Not that I couldn't do it, just that it was more work than was needed.)

Sometimes, too much detail can be the enemy at the table. Where a computer can quickly handle large or complex calculations, most players can't. When Scott designed his Edge mechanics, he capped the Edge pool at 5. I think that was a great design choice. Many mass wargames use d6, because too much detail slows down the game. At some point, we need to say, "This level of detail is fine enough." I draw the line at d20. The gains for going from d20 to d100 do not justify the work.

I'm intrigued by your comment that Rolemaster has gone over to the d20 darkside. What happened? (I stopped following Rolemaster when ICE went under.) Has the new incarnation adopted d20 mechanics?

ICE is still around.  They emerged from bankruptcy in 2001 (much smaller) and released HARP (High Adventure Role Playing) in 2003 or '04.  They've also recently, in the last year or two, released RoleMaster Classic which is basically a very cleaned up remake of RM2.  You can also still buy the pre-bankruptcy RM FRP (Fantasy Role Play) through them which is a more poorly organised version of RM SS (Standard Sysem) though the rules are the same.

If you ever have the chance to get any of the old ICE MERP stuff cheap; get it.  It goes for big bucks on eBay.  ICE lost the liscense during the bankruptcy and Decipher ended up with it.  Cubicle 7 has the rights now.

I see your point about the small value of +1 in a % system but I always liked it because it's very easy to think in terms of percentages.  I never cared for the d6 standard in wargames as it doesn't give a decent enough range of variables.  d10 is better as it almost doubles the variables and we, as humans, tend to think in a base 10 system anyways.  8 or 9 years ago I was toying around with making an rpg system based on a d40 or d60 as I felt that a +1% increment was too small but +5% was too big (I still kind of feel that way actually).

@Alex:  Well said; I'm just raging against the machine.  Man, if I could afford to go to Vegas I would.  Vegas gets pricier as you drift away from Summer (not to mention that it's way further away from me than GenCon; I can easily drive to GenCon or Origins but no way can I drive to Vegas).

jolt