Top D&D designers join Critical Role after quitting Wizards of the Coast
-
This post did not contain any content.
-
This post did not contain any content.
I really hope they're not putting their weight behind Daggerheart long term. That whole hope and fear system is so unappealing.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Good. WotC is wretched hive of scum and villainy.
-
Good. WotC is wretched hive of scum and villainy.
Aren't Hasbro the villain moreso than WotC?
-
Aren't Hasbro the villain moreso than WotC?
-
Good. WotC is wretched hive of scum and villainy.
And Crawford is an incompetent smartass. I honestly don't know what any TTRPG would have to gain from including him in the team.
If they hope to chase 5e's success by following in its footsteps - piss poor adventure modules, nonexistent DM support, unbalanced player options, and a game designer that contradicts himself on Twitter every other post while attempting to explain why he isn't wrong - then good luck to them, I guess.
I very much doubt that 5e became the juggernaut that it's now because of Crawford. If anything, it's despite of him - mostly because of the free publicity granted by things like Critical Role and Stranger Things, and DnD being the default option for anyone who develops an interest in roleplaying for the first time.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Hopefully they fix Daggerheart's open-license. Last I looked it was problematic to say the least.
-
I really hope they're not putting their weight behind Daggerheart long term. That whole hope and fear system is so unappealing.
long term
If you can remember THACO, tabletop games have survived needing to change a few systems in the past
-
long term
If you can remember THACO, tabletop games have survived needing to change a few systems in the past
I don't need to remember it. I'm in the middle of replaying Baldur's Gate 1. But that was more of a complicated math formula to derive something that we can do much more simply. The hope and fear thing not only reminds me of that scam curriculum in Donnie Darko, it also doesn't feel like an interesting tactical layer; it does the opposite by interfering with initiative in a way that I'm not a fan of.
-
Hopefully they fix Daggerheart's open-license. Last I looked it was problematic to say the least.
Same. I tried looking through it and was extremely confused by what I was reading.
-
Same. I tried looking through it and was extremely confused by what I was reading.
I just searched for updates on the matter and found a Lemmy post with a youtube video.
-
I really hope they're not putting their weight behind Daggerheart long term. That whole hope and fear system is so unappealing.
I've never ran it, but what don't you like about it?
-
Aren't Hasbro the villain moreso than WotC?
WotC+D&D is like ~30-40% of Hasbro. The only other brand they have that's worth a similar amount is (ironically enough lmao) Monopoly.
-
This post did not contain any content.
You know, I'm not surprised about that, and not in a good way. CR is part of RPG culture I'm not good with, and I'm totally unsurprised that people who were part of 5e are joining them.
All I can hope is that seeing Hasbro lose people will draw attention to other systems - or for Hasbro to make a marketing push on the Essence20 system in addition to (or instead of) d20.
-
I've never ran it, but what don't you like about it?
It's rooted in the light/dark side of the force from Star Wars tabletop, and kind of inherent to Star Wars is making out everything in the world to be light or dark as though it's that simple, but hardly anything in life is.
-
Aren't Hasbro the villain moreso than WotC?
I mean, sure, but it's like pulling the WotC mask off a Scooby Doo villain.
-
It's rooted in the light/dark side of the force from Star Wars tabletop, and kind of inherent to Star Wars is making out everything in the world to be light or dark as though it's that simple, but hardly anything in life is.
I don't think any designer has ever said it is from Star Wars, and it most definitely does not use them as Light Side/Dark Side or imposed morality. It's inspired by the Genesys rpg system of degrees of success/failure and has narrative effects like "Yes, but" and "No, however".
-
I don't think any designer has ever said it is from Star Wars, and it most definitely does not use them as Light Side/Dark Side or imposed morality. It's inspired by the Genesys rpg system of degrees of success/failure and has narrative effects like "Yes, but" and "No, however".
I'd seen it written up in other articles as coming from Star Wars, so perhaps it was that writer that was mistaken. I've watched them play, heard the rules explanations and such, and "yes, but" and "no, however" to skill checks aren't solving some problem I've had in other systems.
-
It's rooted in the light/dark side of the force from Star Wars tabletop, and kind of inherent to Star Wars is making out everything in the world to be light or dark as though it's that simple, but hardly anything in life is.
I have never seen hope/fear described as light/dark from star wars, and I've read the Daggerheart rules.
-
I have never seen hope/fear described as light/dark from star wars, and I've read the Daggerheart rules.
It came from here.
