Category Archives: talk

So What Is A “Fair” Price For A Gaming PDF?

In his recent series of articles on the “Doom of RPGs” that caused a brief blogquake, James Mishler talks in passing about PDF pricing and specifically calls out Paizo for their plans to sell the Pathfinder RPG PDF for $10 when the printed book costs $50.  This brings to mind an interesting question, which is what *should* a PDF product sell for?

The most basic calculation is to base it on the cost of goods sold.  I’ll use some of the estimates from Mishler’s article.  PDF products still incur the cost of authoring, editing, and art, but the printing, a large component of the COGS (about 25%), is basically free.  Shipping and distribution (10% of MSRP) and retailer markup (50% of MSRP ) are greatly reduced depending on your means of sale – if it’s on your own site, like Paizo, it’s quite low; if it’s through a major online PDF clearinghouse like RPGNow (30% of MSRP) or Indie Press Revolution (15% of MSRP) it’s more.  (Numbers taken from a Pelgrane Press post on the FORGE).  So from a quick blush perspective, if the numbers work out for a $50 MSRP on the book, and even assuming they have to pay 10% of that to keep their online store running, the cost should be half that, or $25 – and that’s just reduction of retailer and distribution costs,  it doesn’t factor in the lack of printing.  That would take it down into the sub-$20 range, considering it as a pure PDF product.

Of course that doesn’t even seem super crazy given that Amazon, who squeezes their logistics down really hard (essentially optimizing the shipping, distribution, and retailer part of the price – they do it more cheaply that Joe Gaming Store can), is selling it for $31.50.

Of course, with PDF pricing, you have…  We’ll politely call it an “art” at work.  For a pure PDF company, maybe you can just sell that product for half what a print product’s MSRP would be and be done with it.  But combined print/PDF companies don’t want to cannibalize their own print sales, so they don’t discount that deeply.  Take Paizo’s usual products, the Adventure Paths – they sell the print copy for $19.99 and the PDF for $13.99 (30% cheaper).  But they throw the PDF in for free with the print sales to subscribers, because the actual incremental COGS is near zero, unlike a physical product.  Anyway, using a pure COGS pricing model they seemingly should sell those things for $10 or less.  But why are they only taking out the “print charge” part and not reflecting the distribution and retail savings to them?

Well, some might blame the “what will someone pay” part of the supply-demand curve.  If someone will pay more, then why not snap up the extra profit on those transactions?  In fact, you’ll note that they charge MSRP and not their cost (even though they charge shipping), meaning that with those direct sales they are the ones making that 50% retailer markup.  On those, they could be construed as “making out like bandits.”  But that’s not the real reason – why don’t they at least match Amazon prices for the print version, for instance?  No, if you sell print products as well as PDF, the overriding concern is that you can’t alienate retailers and distributors, who get angry if you are selling at a competitive price – it means no one will buy from them, and to be fair, they are putting some degree of marketing and placement into your product (though the amount tends to vary directly with how big a player you are…).  You have to balance the increased profit on your direct sales with the potential risk of lost retailer sales.  And the retail channel is usually much larger than the online channel, for decent sized print product producers (it is that way for Goodman Games, for example).  Retailers hate and fear PDF for the obvious reason – see Marcus King’s article in ICv2 for one retailer’s kneejerk reaction to a free PDF giveaway from White Wolf.

So the guy who makes print and PDF – his answer tends towards “just take out the printing cost and charge full MSRP minus that” – about a 30% discount once all the details are tallied.  What direct sales you do make – print or PDF – you at least get to pocket a large percent of it.  You just resign yourself to doing retail at the expense of direct, which is usually a good bet.

Of course, here you start to have a problem.  If you sell PDF-only, you can price your product logically based on COGS and not worry about the retailers.  So you could sell the exact same 96-page, pretty high quality product that represents a Pathfinder Adventure Path – spending the exact same amount on it – for much less.  (Assuming equal units sold, which is of course a big if).  This is why you get people like  Mishler complaining about the downward price pressure PDF products provide – because they are not just competing by removing the cost of printing, but they significantly reduce the cost of distribution and retail as well and thus have the capability of selling the exact same product – even compared to a PDF from a traditional publisher – at a much lower price.  It attacks the entire distributor-retailer model.

The other problem is that I certainly won’t buy a PDF instead of print for only a 30% discount – “I can just get print from Amazon instead for that price,” I tell myself.  So the combo retailer is losing out on their higher margin PDF direct sales because the price isn’t compelling.  (Of course Amazon is able to do that by attacking the distributor-retailer model slightly less radically.)

The big question that drives this is, for RPGs in general, and for a given product, how elastic is the price curve really?  In your high school economics courses we learn that if price falls, you sell more units.  There’s an open question as to how true that is in a small market like RPGs, however.

One example – the second installment in a Paizo Adventure Path.  I am willing to bet that the demand for it is very inelastic.  Some percentage of people who bought Chapter 1 will buy it.  Dropping its price by 50% might get a couple additional sales, but wouldn’t bring a linear flood of people to the product.

As a counterexample, the new Pathfinder RPG rules.  A lot of people have heard of it, and it’s the core rulebook.  One might expect price response to be more elastic.  Anecdotes aren’t proof, but I have a friend who is a very occassional D&D player.  We were talking and he heard about Pathfinder and how the beta’s free and the PDF will only be $10.  A $50 hardback – there’s no way in hell he’d venture that on something unknown.  But he read the beta, plans on getting the PDF as soon as it’s out, and is now bugging me to form another gaming group so we can play Pathfinder.  There’s every reason to believe this would convert to a print sale and then other products to him and others in the group eventually.  (Social networks are a huge factor in RPG sales once you get above the “I just buy it to read it” collector market.)  Pricing the PDF at 30% off $50 MSRP (=Amazon retail) is certainly not going to make any incremental sales.  Even pricing it at the “fair” $20 or so won’t – that’s more than the price of a random book in the bookstore I might take a chance on.  Before I spend $20 on a book, video, or CD I generally need to be pretty sure I’m going to like it.  It’s above my (and therefore most Americans’) impulse buy threshold.  $10 becomes a “Heck, why not?” price point that for an introductory product is great.  (I have yet to see a player in any of my gaming groups use a PDF copy of a core rulebook as their only reference copy in a game.)

Then on the far side is a competing commodity.  A d20 monster book, for example – there are many.  Price will be a big part of the buying equation here.  You should really look at how many more units retail will really get you versus the lost profit on your (low priced) direct sales.  If you’re really small and going to retail is just going to make you print additional units that you’ll be on the hook for when retailers stick your book in the back of a stack, PDF is the way to go.

Anyway, if the demand response to an RPG product is inelastic – you may as well do print only and charge a lot for it.  If you do offer PDF, don’t bother discounting it much.  If it’s highly elastic, you want to leverage the overhead reduction of cutting out print, distribution, and retail as much as possible.

There’s also the Wizards of the Coast solution, which is to just eliminate PDF sales entirely.  That’s not about piracy, that’s just a convenient excuse to throw blame on an unpopular scapegoat – Wizards print products arrive OCRed and PDFed on torrent sites within days of release.  It’s about making so much money from the print sales that really you don’t want to have to deal with this issue at all, and the thought of PDF sales causing any effect on print sales sends you into a sweat.  This is a little strange, because you’d think something like D&D 4e would fall into the more-elastic category – it’s in bookstores and allegedly targeted at getting new gamers – but clearly the issue is complex enough that people’s feelings and assumptions get mixed all in with facts and economics.  It’s easy for people to feel a need for control of the market – whether it’s Wizards saying “electronic delivery is only OK via our subscription-based D&D Insider or Amazon being able to delete purchased e-books off your Kindle.

Anyway, there’s no earthshakign conclusion here, just that:

1.  “Cheap” PDF products are approriately priced from a COGS standpoint

2.  Print products are/should be about twice as expensive as PDF products

3.  Print retailers and distributors won’t let a print company sell PDFs at a competitive rate (and they don’t sell PDFs themselves) leading to the doom-prediction that “PDFs are too cheap.”  That re not too cheap to produce, but they are too cheap to support the current predominant distributor-retailer model.

4.  Therefore, the print and PDF markets are in opposition as they come from incompatible models.  Kudos to people like Paizo that try innovative things to make it work, but in general they’ll have high priced PDFs and get grief from their distributors/retailers all the time.  Punting on PDF sales, like Wizards, sucks but at their size 1% increase in retailer/distributor goodwill yielding a .01% increase in sales is probably worth more to them than all their PDF sales.

5.  As the world becomes more virtual (Kindle, iPhone, etc.) PDF/other electronic formats will become more important.  Traditional publishers will start losing out to those embracing the new model – the record companies aren’t doing so well, but Apple’s iTunes is doing great :-).  This doesn’t mean the “RPG industry” will collapse, just that it will have to adapt to a new way of doing business, and there may be significant change to established roles of publishers, distributors, and retailers as a result.

Dark Heresy Character – “Shiv,” Your Kind Of Scum

Dark Heresy, the Warhammer 40,000 RPG, is up for a bunch of awards at the ENnies this year.  I really like it.  To give you a taste, here’s a character – you can choose, but you can also make a completely random character.  Here’s a completely random one for your enjoyment!

Gaius, also known as “Shiv.”

Home World: Imperial World (a major “first world” civilized planet), but a largely forgotten backwater.

Imperial World Traits:

  • Blessed Ignorance (ignorance of naughtiness gives a -5 on Forbidden Lore)
  • Hagiography (meditation on the lives of the saints gives Common Lore: Imperial Creed, Imperium, and War as Basic Skills)
  • Liturgical Familiarity (accustomed to the preaching of the Ecclesiarchy; Literacy and Speak High Gothic are Basic Skills)
  • Superior Origins (knowing the Emperor loves you gives +3 Willpower)

Characteristics: (on 2d10+20, I was pretty darn lucky)

  • Weapon Skill: 32
  • Ballistic Skill: 39 (Simple Advance)
  • Strength: 31
  • Toughness: 30
  • Agility: 36 (Simple Advance)
  • Intelligence: 30
  • Perception: 31
  • Willpower: 37
  • Fellowship: 28

Career Path: Scum (you know, scum.  Like it sounds.)
Starting Rank: Dreg

Basic Skills: (You roll percentile versus the relevant characteristic)

  • Awareness (Per) +10
  • Blather (Fel)
  • Dodge (Agi)
  • Deceive (Fel)

Advanced Skills:

  • Common Lore: Imperium (Int)
  • Common Lore: Imperial Creed (Int)
  • Common Lore: War (Int)
  • Drive (Ground Vehicle) (Agi)
  • Literacy (Int)
  • Speak Low Gothic (Int)
  • Speak High Gothic (Int)

Talents:

  • Ambidextrous
  • Melee Weapon Training (Primitive)
  • Pistol Training (SP)
  • Basic Weapon Training (SP)

Gear:

  • Shotgun and 12 shells
  • Knife
  • Quilted vest
  • Dirty coveralls

Wounds: 10

Fate Points: 2

Cash: 12 Throne Gelt

Shiv is a fit stripling of 30 years.  He has ruddy skin, green eyes, with hair dyed to match.  He wears David Bowie-style makeup.  His Imperial Tarot reading is “Only the insane have strength enough to prosper.  Only those who prosper may judge what is sane.”  He starts with 2 Insanity Points as a result.

Now comes the only non-random part; I spend a starting 400 XP to boost his abilities.  First I advance Shiv’s BS and Agility characteristics.  As for skills, I advance his Awareness +10 and buy Drive (Ground Vehicle).  It’s actually a little unclear how you do this.  If you buy the skill twice, you get a +10 in it (Skill Mastery).  But it’s not clear if you can buy a skill “on top of” your Homeworld and Starting Career Path skills.  Could I buy Dodge, which is in the advance list, to boost my Dodge to +10?  Hmmm.

OK, so that’s the character generation.  The character concept emerges easily – Shiv is a makeup-bedecked gangster in the tradition of Clockwork Orange (an opportunity to call his fellow party members “droogs”!).  He is very handy behind the wheel, and saved the life of a visiting Inquisitor.  He was acting as his hired driver, and a Chaos-touched gang tried to take them out.  With steering wheel in one hand and his shotgun in the other, he got them the heck out of there.  The Inquisitor decided an enterprising chap like this would be valuable as support to his Acolytes.  He doesn’t know that Shiv’s a little unhinged from being a former member of that Khorne-worshipping gang they fought!

Now, Shiv travels with the Acolytes and hunts down psykers, xenos, Daemon worshippers, and freaks and heretics of all descriptions in the name of the God-Emperor!

And that’s Dark Heresy in a nutshell.

Minigames in RPGs

You know what seems to always go over very well in RPGs?  Playing games.  You know, a game *within* the game world.  People love it.  Whether it’s as simple as a knife throwing contest or as complex as a game of whist, it’s a classic RPG tradition.

I remember the first game-within-a-game I played – back in the 1980s, with my very first RPG, Star Frontiers.  In “Starspawn of Volturnus,” you have to play a kind of Buzkashi (mounted ball-carrying game) to get the Ul-Mor, a primitive race of land-lubbing octopi, to help you against the Sathar menace.

Most recently, the Curse of the Crimson Throne adventure path had three such mini-games!  You can play “knivesies” in Escape from Old Korvosa, where two competitors get on a table with a knife and money from everyone betting.  You can guess the victory conditions. Here’s a blow by blow of our knivesies game.

Accordingly, Malcolm decides to play some knivesies! This popular game involves two combatants standing on a table, with a knife and a bunch of gold from bettors placed in the middle. The game ends when one person’s dead, unconscious, off the table, or there’s no more gold on the table. No rules other than that. The gold’s split between the winner and the bettors standing on their side of the table. “I’m the baddest bastard in the hizzouse! Bigger then old King Kong, badder than a junkyard dog!” exclaims Malcolm, to whip the crowd into a betting frenzy and to intimidate his opponent.

He faces off against Thugly the Thug Leader (apparently this gang is so low rent that its members don’t even have proper names), who moves first and grabs the knife. He slashes at Malcolm, missing him, and Malcom hauls off and punches him in the face. He stabs Malcolm but Malcolm beats him like a red-headed stepchild with a pimp slap and a throat punch. “Never bring a knife to a fistfight,” growls Malcolm. The thug swipes feebly at Malcolm, and Malcolm hauls off and belts him twice in the face, “Every Which Way But Loose” style. The thug collapses to the floor. Bets are paid off.

In A History of Ashes, you get to play sredna with “Krojin Eats-What-He-Kills,” a Shoanti barbarian.  This involves strapping your heads together with a rawhide thong and pulling until someone breaks down or gives up from the pain.  Needless to say, Malcolm couldn’t resist this either…

Krojin challenges Malcolm to “sredna,” where two people stand forehead to forehead and then a leather cord is tied around their ears and the back of their heads, and when the match starts they back away from each other, incurring great pain. He accepts on the grounds that it sounds more painful than knivesies, even. The braves bind Malcolm and Krojin together, and they stay forehead to forehead for three rounds, gnashing their teeth and intimidating each other.

They both scream and gnash. Malcolm wins 3 of 3 Intimidate checks. “So fierce!!!” says Annata. Krojin starts pulling on the cord, but Malcolm resists and pulls back. He’s doing quite well. “He is so good at tugging on another man’s ears!” Annata says to Thorndyke. Thorndyke smacks his palm to his forehead.

They vie for supremacy for another couple rounds. Malcolm is doing well; he seems stronger than the barbarian but may give out quicker due to a lower fortitude. “Put the squeal in Squeal-Quah!” cries Annata. The crowd is eager and cheering. Malcolm pulls again and Krojin gives in, bowing his head to let the cord twang over the back of his skull! Annata hops up and down, cheering. Krojin “Eats-What-He-Kills” rolls around in the dirt to get his mind right, and ends up complimenting Malcolm. “I never knew they had hobbies besides rape and arson,” reflects Annata.

Apparently there’s another game in Escape from Old Korvosa called “Blood Pig.”  It is one of our greatest regrets that we never got to play this. In short, these mini-games were very well received and everyone got to enjoy participating, betting, or snarkily commenting on them.

What brought this to mind?  There’s a Cracked article called “5 Modern Sports That Started As Excuses for Sex and Violence.”  It hearkens to lovely things like medieval football.  Imagine the PCs wandering into a village where the whole populace is doing anything within their power, up to and including assault, to get a ball to the other side of town.

So add one to your next game!  Or write a “20 Violent Medieval Games” supplement.  In any event, consider that games add competition and rules crunch without requiring actual killing (in most circumstances), and those lessened stakes mean more character interaction and roleplaying.

ENnie Nominees and Voting Guide

The big annual RPG awards, the ENnies, have narrowed down to their final list of nominees.  Fan voting begins on June 24th, when you get to vote and decide whose cuisine reigns supreme!  Here, pretend you’re watching FOX News, and I’ll tell you what to think to prepare you for the occassion.

Best Adventure

Analysis: You can’t beat the Paizo Adventure Paths, they are all brilliant.  Well, Second Darkness stumbled, but Howl of the Carrion King is back to the superb form of Rise of the Runelords and Curse of the Crimson Throne.  No one makes adventures like this any more, if they ever did.  Big win!

Best Aid or Accessory

Analysis: Wolfgang Baur’s Kobold Quarterly is the real successor to Dragon Magazine.  Great content.  Plenty of interesting free stuff (interviews, etc.) on their Web site as well.

Continue reading

Wayfinder #1

If you haven’t yet, you should  definitely check out the first issue of the Wayfinder fanzine (it’s free!) covering the world of Pathfinder.  It’s a beautiful 77-page full color professionally produced e-zine.  There’s fiction, monsters, spells, humor, traits, prestige classes…  All kinds of rules tidbits for 3.5 compatible play and all kinds of resources for those running scenarios or APs in the world of Golarion!

I finally got a chance to read it now that I’ve fixed my computer after a week of pain (pro tip: a normal XP boot disk doesn’t have the drivers required to see a SATA hard drive).  I’m very impressed.    The art is great too.

I Return! Eat My Links!

Whew.  Sorry it’s been a bit without a post, Devoted Readers.  I went to a (work) convention in California for a week and then my hard drive at home totally failed; I’m posting from a borrowed laptop.  And I’ve been busy in general otherwise (Father’s Day, a campaign finale, prepping to host an upcoming gathering on the Fourth…).   But here’s some little tidbits to tide you over till I can get to you with more!

Read what may be the best RPG review ever, Darren MacLennan’s review of Wraeththu, over on RPG.net.

The 2009 Origins Awards winners are in!  Stripping away all the crap (non-RPG) categories, basically Mouse Guard won best RPG, beating out D&D 4e, and Serenity Adventures for Firefly won best RPG supplement.  Congrats!

Paizo declares that the PDF version of their Pathfinder RPG main book ($50, coming out at Gen Con) will only be $9.99!  Meanwhile, the WotC assclowns still huddle behind their gated walls, refusing to sell PDFs.

P.S.  We finished up Curse of the Crimson Throne this weekend and faced the Queen and all her various related evils.  Death or glory?  Hint: glory!  The session summary’s coming as soon as I can get to it.

Mock the Monsters!

I saw that Cracked has a new article up entitled “15 Retarded Dungeons & Dragons Monsters“.  It’s OK, but really a lot of these monsters are just kinda stupid, not really humor-article-worthy stupid.  (Insert 4e rust monster joke here.)

For those left wanting more (or better), there are some older articles along the same lines.

Head Injury Theater’s “Dungeons & Dragons: Celebrating 30 Years Of Very Stupid Monsters” and “Dungeons & Dragons: Celebrating 30 Years Of Very Stupid Monsters – Part 2” are the best IMO.

Then, Something Awful has “WTF, D&D: 1st Edition Monster Manual, Part 1“and subsequent mockings…

Enjoy!

Why Complain About 4e? Stop the Edition Wars!

As one of those who is known to still vent the occasional rant at 4e, let me chime in to explain why it’s not just pure wickedness and hate behind why I and others who find fault with 4e don’t just “shut up and go away.”

This entry started as a response to a good post by Zachary the First in response to a Newbie DM article.  It got long and I thought I’d post it here in expanded form.

I think what happened in the 3.5e->4e transition is clear to everyone who has analyzed the edition change to any degree. In short, a significant number of 3e and other legacy D&D players who enjoy simulationist play feel mostly left out in 4e as the rules changed to not support that playstyle well.  The point of this post isn’t to debate this truth (go here for that); I think at this point it’s pretty much accepted among both 4e fans and detractors.

Which is fair enough. D&D play styles have been diverse over time; certain editions have supported different styles better, there are other games out there, etc.  No playstyle is the “one true way,” it’s all personal preference.

However, besides the nostalgic cachet to the D&D trademark, there’s no denying that WotC is the 900 pound gorilla in the RPG market and D&D is the most played game. More support material is published for D&D than anything else.   This means that the change in playstyle support has other secondary effects felt outside the printed pages of the PHB.

Some people – experienced gamers with a knowledge of the larger RPG landscape –  pick the game system they rationally prefer. Many, many others are led into a default play style by the game they pick up first, the game that is on every bookstore shelf and the majority of people play – in this case, the majority of gamers are led to 4e by virtue of its market dominance and then get “molded” into the 4e style by playing it.

I think it’s clear that not all that market share is a clear case of “people have specifically chosen gamist tactical combat as their preferred mode of gaming;” with any new edition most sales are driven by “this is the new version of that popular thing.”  But players begin, consciously and unconsciously, adhering to its default metaphor.

As we all know, gaming is a social hobby, and it can be hard to find gaming groups and, on the publishing side, get sufficient critical mass to get “fringe” products produced.

As a result, there is significant incentive for me and others who prefer a different type of gaming to continue to advocate for D&D to (re-)adopt our mindset (in 5e, if nothing else). Because when your style of gaming is marginalized outside D&D, then your ability to find like minded gamers and get products that suit your needs is severely degraded. Thus, even if I don’t play 4e, it affects me negatively by affecting the larger gaming ecosystem. (Note that me house-ruling to accomplish simulation in 4e doesn’t reduce any of these secondary effects, and is therefore not a useful solution).

This ecosystem effect is obvious.  It’s why Microsoft pushes Windows – it’s not just for the dollars from Windows sales but from the effect on the resulting computing ecosystem that works against Mac, Linux, etc. on multiple levels.  It’s just an effect, only good or bad from the point of view of which side of the ecosystem you play in.

It’s traditional that the majority doesn’t understand the concern of the marginalized – why be angry?  Go with the flow!  Nobody’s telling you what to do!  But in the end, it’s not that simple (ask any minority group).  It’s not anyone’s intent to marginalize simulation gamers, but intent has nothing to do with the actual results.

And that’s why I personally plan to continue to agitate for changes to D&D to reintegrate the simulationist banner within the game. Doing so produces:

  • the ability for me to play the best-supported and most-played RPG
  • the network effect of producing other games and gamers who are fluent in simulation play

Make sense?  It’s not about an “edition war.”  No one’s giving out a medal for “objectively best version of D&D.”   It’s about “we want this kind of gameplay actively included in the world’s most popular role-playing game ™”.  The discussion isn’t “over” because the latest version doesn’t support it; there will always be another version.  In fact, it seems somewhat offensive and self-serving to tell people who don’t like 4e to “just go away, then” – our input into the development of D&D is just as valid as we’re still potential new customers.

I don’t begrudge anyone enjoying 4e or not liking simulation play.  These effects are not any of your “fault.”  However, in aggregate, the effect that D&D 4e has of supporting and predominating products, gamers, and gaming groups that are simulation unfriendly results in marginalization and therefore measurable harm to my enjoyment of the hobby.

And I don’t think that continuing to advocate for this is totally in vain, either.  Wizards certainly changed their tune some on the whole GSL/OGL thing, and I like to believe that change was facilitated by the press and critique that people, including myself, brought to bear.

Given all this, I hope the intelligent readers out there in the community will realize that this is the core problem that all the common retorts to criticism of 4e totally miss – “Well don’t play it then,” “House rule it!,” “People just fear change,” “4e’s out, it’s over, give up,” “Why don’t you complain about other games,” “I like 4e better because…”  All valid thoughts, none of which come logically to bear on this problem.  There are other RPGs I “don’t like,” that aren’t open, that only cater to one play style or another.  But this is the one that pushes the entire industry in its direction, so both as a habitual D&D player but also as a RPG gamer in general, I have a vested interest in its course and desire input into it.

Some Weapons Ideas For Our Alternity Campaign

There’s an awesome new Cracked article called “7 Ridiculously Over-The-Top Modifications to Deadly Weapons.”   They include the chainsaw bayonet and a crossbow attachment for an AR-15.    Just goes to show, no bizarre SF weapon combo is weirder than what people will actually make.

chainsawgun

They have another recent one, the “7 WTF Military Weapons You Won’t Believe They Actually Built.”

My favorite?  You’ve heard the term “crotch rocket” applied to a motorcycle, right?  Well check this out…

cannonscooter

It’s hard to come up with crazy R&D ideas in Paranoia that haven’t already been done by some crazed Nazi or another…

The 10 Greatest Dungeons & Dragons End Bosses

Ooo, I just ran across this article on Topless Robot and it was too good not to share!

I totally agree with some of them – the Slave Lords, for example!  And Strahd, Lolth, and Sakatha are good choices.  Some of the rest are weaker, though, it seems like they’re sticking hard to 1e AD&D for the list.

Some of my picks?  Well, you can’t leave off Bargle, even if (until recently) he was more implict than explicit.  And for more Basic fun, the Master of the Desert Nomads was a fan favorite hereabouts.

2e’s harder. Although if you play your cards right you can fight Orcus!  A lot of these, especially the Greyhawk ones, tended to be sandboxy so there’s not necessarily “end bosses” – like Rary’s stats are in Rary the Traitor but I’m not sure he really counts as an end boss there.

In 3e, the WotC adventures blew chunks, but there were still some excellent end bosses out there.  Sea Lord Drac from the Freeport Trilogy, for example.  And the end boss Xanesha from The Skinsaw Murders, second chapter of the Rise of the Runelords adventure path, is hated and feared by many a PC party.

And, of course, there’s Invisible Christopher Walken!

Who are we forgetting?  Who are the boss end bosses?  And why are there so few, especially post-1e?

How Much Does Character Optimization Count?

A lot of the critique surrounding the new Pathfinder iconic previews seems to be that they’re not fully optimized and therefore not viable characters.  Some people feel that only optimized builds will see play, and that classes can only be valuable if compared in their most optimized form.

This post by rgalex sums up my thinking, which is that making an interesting character is more important than the optimization.  But let’s see what people out there think.

I feel like the minority’s obsession with optimization is one of the things that has caused the major class and magic redesign in 4e.  Without real spells or the flexibility of 3e, it’s nigh impossible to devise “uber” builds and you get enforced balance.

I personally like not having to optimize.  But I’ll admit, I feel pressured into it in some campaigns.  If an adventure or campaign is tuned for high power, then – I don’t like dying any more than the next guy.  So I’ll step it up.  Similarly, if all the other characters are high power and you’re not, or even worse if one guy is Pun-Pun and no one else is, that degrades the fun.

But all it requires to work out and be fun is to not be obsessed with optimization.  All the classes and other choices are equally viable at normal levels of tuning. But it does require a social contract between players and DM – and some groups appear to not be able to moderate anything that’s not rules as written.

Is it this syndrome that’s “forced the hand” of the D&D devs to go to the new “next class, same as the last class” model?

Mike Mearls Strangles Realism In D&D Like It’s An Unruly Hooker

I hate to keep saying “I told you so” about Fourth Edition D&D, but there’s a thread on TheRPGSite that talks about the new Rust Monster in the MMII.  I really can’t believe what I’m reading.

As most of you know, in D&D the Rust Monster is a weird-looking mostly harmless critter feared by adventurers because of its diet.  It touches metal with its feathery antennae and cause it to rust into bits, then it eats the rust.

Well, apparently the thought of anyone losing a magic item is no longer tolerable to the Wizards designers.  Check it out:

Attack Mode: Dissolve Metal (standard action; per encounter) • Targets a creature wearing or wielding a rusting magic item of 10th level or lower or any non-magic rusting item; +9 vs. Reflex; the rusting item is destroyed.
Residuum Recovery • A rust monster consumes any item it destroys. The residuum from any magic items the monster has destroyed can be retrieved from its stomach. The residuum is worth the market value of the item (not one-fifth the value).

“Residuum” is the magic dust that you can disenchant 4e magic items into.  Normally, as part of their ridiculous and sad economic rules, it’s only worth 20% of the item’s cost.  However, the Rust Monster now kindly keeps it at full price for you in its gullet.  There’s an explicit rationale for this in the “A Guide to Using Rust Monsters” section in the MM2 which boils down to “don’t make any nine year olds cry”…

Eventually, though, the PCs should have an opportunity to regain their lost equipment by using the residuum found in the monster. Although a PC might lose an item, it is intended that the loss be only temporary, which is why the residuum recovered from a rust monster is equal to the full value of the destroyed item. How the PCs deal with the loss is what makes the rust monster fun. Be wary of PCs who try to abuse a rust monster’s powers to their advantage by using rust monsters to consume items the PCs would otherwise sell for one-fifth value. In such cases, you should reduce the resulting residuum to one-fifth value, effectively making the rust monster a free Disenchant Magic Item ritual.

What, they didn’t bother rule-izing that last part by giving it a “Detect Intent” power that would formally change the residuum value based on its reading of the character’s mind?

Seriously, come the fuck on.  Realism and consequences are not “fun”, according to Mearls and the other 4e writers.  All those people who have enjoyed playing any other edition of D&D must be confused.

Why not just take that small additional step and have characters respawn close to the dungeon with all their gear?  God forbid a dead party member gets left behind or some other factor causes them to lose their stuff.  Or have un-fun trips to get raised or otherwise be out of the action for more than five minutes.  Some of the 4e community is dismissive of “these tired comparisons of 4e to MMORPGs” but – the truth’s the truth.  This is a pure computer game move.

Heck, put spawn points in the dungeon.  I was amused recently when I got Unreal Tournament 3 on the XBox 360 and in the cutscenes they actually refer to the respawn points as real, in-world things.  Most games have the courtesy to pretend they don’t really exist (I know, it actually makes some sense in the UT universe…  But this isn’t XCrawl, it’s D&D.).  Time for D&D to do the same thing!  Dying, gear loss, etc. should all be only moments of delay from getting back in the melee!

I mean, I’m honestly not averse to that in some fringe take-off of the genre like XCrawl.  But in D&D?  In a core world that supposedly might make some sense, like the fantasy worlds from those things called books people used to read?  Really?