About the Rule Change Threads...

[The Beast]

Awhile back Palladium Books had a few threads asking what kinds of rule changes we would like to see. Does anyone know what the results are?

[NMI]

I'll ask Kevin and crew about your question. They would be the only ones who could give you an answer based on facts to your question.

[Jerell]

There's been a fairly healthy debate about AR over in the PFRPG forum. I like the either the Mark Hall or Compendium of weapons and armor way of doing SDC AR. That's one thing I can think of that would be a good update. Would be cool to know what the powers that be make of it all. That being said, if I had to guess they're most likely busy writing or putting together new product (right?).

[Alrik Vas]

I thought the discussion went a lot better than has been reported in the above posts. No offense guys, but some of us actually did have some points to make, and I was more than willing to listen to what everyone was saying. I learned a few things and even saw some really good suggestions.

Yeah, some of it was combative, but that's the nature of us gamers when it comes to our hobby.

[The Beast]

I thought the discussion went a lot better than has been reported in the above posts. No offense guys, but some of us actually did have some points to make, and I was more than willing to listen to what everyone was saying. I learned a few things and even saw some really good suggestions.

Yeah, some of it was combative, but that's the nature of us gamers when it comes to our hobby.

What?

[Alrik Vas]

Heh, you seemed to talk about it in at best, neutral terms. I thought it was pretty positive. That's what I took from it, anyway. Maybe its just a case of me not reading your statement correctly.

[The Beast]

Heh, you seemed to talk about it in at best, neutral terms. I thought it was pretty positive. That's what I took from it, anyway. Maybe its just a case of me not reading your statement correctly.

This thread, this thread, and this thread are what I'm talking about...

[Dreamstreamer]

Those threads encouraged me to rejoin the forum after almost a decade hiatus. I participated in the discussion and was excited for the initiative. Here is the result I remember:
Something Unexpected

Which caused a bit of a backlash that was addressed the following week here:
Controversy over Good News

I was disappointed (and a bit incredulous) with the result, thinking that some of the suggestions were pretty good (or at least worthy of further consideration), but c'est la vie! I wasn't privy to the totality of research done, only the discussions on the forum.

In the end, I believe Kevin does what he feels is best for his company. I can't fault that!

[jaymz]

Expect pretty much no changes any time soon if ever. Not to the magnitude some would like to see anyway.

We will likely still see rule changes and such done in reprintings of book but we are never told what any changes may be and that leads to a significant amount of rule "debates" since one printing of a book says one thing while a later printing says another.

Examples? CWC Special Forces OCC IIRC has a bunch of added "special things" to it in later printings buy if you have the 1st printing? Nope.

Also recently there a very big discussion about a certain weapon in Robotech Shadow Chronicles. The first pringint manga listed this weapon as two separate projectile weapons with different names. The hardcover deluxe edition and 2nd printing of the manga changed them into a single versatile energy weapon. Nothing was ever mentioned or said about it.

This has happened in a number of books over the last 20 years. By and large no one knows about any of it and argue things when the reality is we are all playing with dozens of variations of what we think are THE rules not a single set of rules we all know to be the same.

So while we see some change, we never know about it unless some fan HAPPENS to catch it right now. The kind of change those threads were created for will never happen in my opinion since, according to the only known surveying done, 98% of people are happy with things exactly the way they are and the unhappy ones aren't likely to be palladium customers or fans anyway. (and we know how ...... accurate ...... that surveying was)

[ScottBernard]

So it was for nothing then?

[jaymz]

The optics would indicate so.

No real way to know yay or nay as far as internally at PB goes.

[Tor]

I think if Palladium introduces text in a new printing, they should list within the book 'added in 4th printing' or something along those lines, so that people discussing those rules would be aware to disclaim "but anyone who has printings 1-3 would not see this".

Similarly, second editions should note things like that.

If it's ugly to include it in the book, then it should be included in a free online errata.

Also I think, much like Chaos Earth, Kev should just write off RUE as a new dimension and ignore all these new rules about modern weapons and stuff which utterly conflict with the world he has built so far.

[The Beast]

I'll ask Kevin and crew about your question. They would be the only ones who could give you an answer based on facts to your question.

So did you find out anything official yet?

[Dreamstreamer]

For a long time now I've taken it for granted that the games are only playable if you make your own house rules, and everything about the way the books are presented implies that doing so is encouraged.

Why buy a game with unplayable rules? What is the point of the purchase? Sounds like a monetized version of Calvinball...which isn't necessarily a bad thing.

I viewed those threads as an opportunity to reduce the amount of "house ruling" needed out of the box. Not even the suggestions in "Rules Changes: A Little" (many of which look like clarifications more than changes) appear to have been considered for future revisions, because an informal poll showed that most people "fans" are happy with what you just labeled as unplayable rules.

I mostly stick with the rules as presented, but there are inevitably going to be problems that require a custom rule to resolve.

Wait. You just said the game is unplayable without house rules. Are you saying that the rules (as presented) all work, there just aren't enough of them, necessitating additional house rules? The house rules just fill in the blanks that crop up in play? Perhaps incomplete would be a better label than unplayable?

I don't need an official fix from Palladium. If I don't like a rule I just plain don't play by it.

Now there are too many rules, so you drop some?

May you ever be appointed GM and always have players that look to you for house rules at your table!

[Alrik Vas]

I can't tell you how many custom rules I use just from memory. Though we have fun in the game world and that's basically the point.

However, I'm also very curious as to if there was ever any official response to the rule change threads.

[Damian Magecraft]

I can't tell you how many custom rules I use just from memory. Though we have fun in the game world and that's basically the point.

However, I'm also very curious as to if there was ever any official response to the rule change threads.

I recall (But cannot find at the moment) a post by alex that implied that because there was no coherency or consistency in what needed changed that nothing was going to be done.

Or in other words...
We fans are our own worst enemy in this situation...
Until we fans can all get on the same page as to what we would like to see in the way of a change it is going to continue to be the status quo.

[Alrik Vas]

Well, I think they should do what's best for the game overall. Lots of games alienate their long-time fans by making changes, but those changes are designed to bring in a new demographic of player, which ultimately makes the game line thrive.

In short, listen to our ideas yeah, then discard all the things about those ideas you don't like. I think Siembieda and the rest, though they do care about what we think, certaintly have the capacity to look at it from a business standpoint.

[popscythe]

Lots of games alienate their long-time fans by making changes, but those changes are designed to bring in a new demographic of player, which ultimately makes the game line thrive

The prequel trilogy made more money than the original trilogy. Yeah, I went there. Not everything that changes the canon of a property to make it appeal to new users is a good thing, even if results in a temporary sales boost. The prequel trilogy is arguably the worst received addition to a franchise of all time. If he had it to do over again, do you think george lucas would choose... wait this is a terrible example, of course he would choose the money over the quality, it's current day George Lucas.

I'm just really, really, really grateful that we have current day Kevin Siembedia instead of current day George Lucas.

Keep up the great work, Mr. S.

[jaymz]

Actually your example is poor and not for the reasons you seem to think.

Without the prequel trilogy we do not get the larger influx of new material via comic, book and video game etc. Sure there were books etc at the time but the prequel trilogy expanded that well beyond what was being done. Without the prequel trilogy we do not get the clone wars tv series (the micro and actual), nor do we get the upcoming Rebels tv series.

Furthermore, I think it is vastly overstated just how many old fans were upset by the prequel trilogy. I equate those types to the same people that scream and shout that Michael Bay raped their childhood with his Transformers movie. They are blinded by the nostalgia of how they felt when they first viewed the original trilogy. Here's a newsflash, the original trilogy as awesome as it was, was not a classic by way of it's writing and story. Both are old time traditional stories and dialogue (minus the sci fi vocabulary at times) which is exactly what Lucas was trying to do. Anyone here that knows me, knows just how long and how much of a Star Wars fan I am and if I can accept the prequels for what they are and still enjoy them as such then guess what? The problem isn't the movies.

My point? Change is good and change is needed if you want to actually prosper and not just survive. I want Palladium to prosper. Right now it is just surviving.

Now I agree with Damian in that the way they went about it and what they saw is correct. Too many differing opinions as to what needs changing, including don't change anything. However, there are "changes" they could make, and not just with the rules, they could make that wouldn't really change much of the rules at all, and would increase the company's prosperity because of it. Problem is, on the non rule side of things, that they apparently will not or cannot change on their own so everything remains the status quo, which is the company survives. In this growing age of the "instant gratification" desired by the demographic they should be targeting (which for the record should NOT be us 30+ year old gamers) this will NOT be sustainable long term. Once we, that are left, stop buying, there are very few of us left to buy and that means they are done.

[Kryptt]

Shouldn't it be the powers that be who should know what the weaknesses of the system are? From there PB can see what needs fixing or PB can just do a complete rewrite of the entire system ushering in the renaissance for PB that Kevin mentions in the link above where Kevin insults Jorel. As has been pointed out nothing will change because a few fans are happy with the status quo.

[Damian Magecraft]

Shouldn't it be the powers that be who should know what the weaknesses of the system are? From there PB can see what needs fixing or PB can just do a complete rewrite of the entire system ushering in the renaissance for PB that Kevin mentions in the link above where Kevin insults Jorel. As has been pointed out nothing will change because a few fans are happy with the status quo.

Often those closest to a problem are blind to it.
So no it is not a given that the PTBs should be aware of what "issues" there are with a system.
And no it is not because a few are satisfied with the way the system is currently.
It is because they speak with one voice.

Do you know how we got the current RUE casting rules? A huge majority spoke with ONE voice on the problem.
We got the current iteration of the -10 rule the same way. The majority spoke at length as a cohesive whole on what the problem was.
There is no consensus on what the problem with the current system actually is. You have hundreds of voices saying it needs scrapped, hundreds saying this group of rules needs "fixed", still more saying that group of rules, etc...
The Fans cannot agree in meaningful numbers as to exactly what they want.
So what if we think 80% of the fans want a change if we cannot even get 20% of them to agree on what to change?
Want to see a change? Then as group we have to come to a consensus on what kind of changes we would like to see.
Only then, maybe, will we see something done.

[popscythe]

Spoiler:

Actually your example is poor and not for the reasons you seem to think.

Without the prequel trilogy we do not get the larger influx of new material via comic, book and video game etc. Sure there were books etc at the time but the prequel trilogy expanded that well beyond what was being done. Without the prequel trilogy we do not get the clone wars tv series (the micro and actual), nor do we get the upcoming Rebels tv series.

Furthermore, I think it is vastly overstated just how many old fans were upset by the prequel trilogy. I equate those types to the same people that scream and shout that Michael Bay raped their childhood with his Transformers movie. They are blinded by the nostalgia of how they felt when they first viewed the original trilogy. Here's a newsflash, the original trilogy as awesome as it was, was not a classic by way of it's writing and story. Both are old time traditional stories and dialogue (minus the sci fi vocabulary at times) which is exactly what Lucas was trying to do. Anyone here that knows me, knows just how long and how much of a Star Wars fan I am and if I can accept the prequels for what they are and still enjoy them as such then guess what? The problem isn't the movies.

My point? Change is good and change is needed if you want to actually prosper and not just survive. I want Palladium to prosper. Right now it is just surviving.

Now I agree with Damian in that the way they went about it and what they saw is correct. Too many differing opinions as to what needs changing, including don't change anything. However, there are "changes" they could make, and not just with the rules, they could make that wouldn't really change much of the rules at all, and would increase the company's prosperity because of it. Problem is, on the non rule side of things, that they apparently will not or cannot change on their own so everything remains the status quo, which is the company survives. In this growing age of the "instant gratification" desired by the demographic they should be targeting (which for the record should NOT be us 30+ year old gamers) this will NOT be sustainable long term. Once we, that are left, stop buying, there are very few of us left to buy and that means they are done.

hahahaha someone on the planet earth just got baited into defending the prequel trilogy

[jaymz]

Actually I wasn't defending the prequel trilogy in and of itself but If that is how you see it that is your issue not mine.

[Marcus]

Shouldn't it be the powers that be who should know what the weaknesses of the system are? From there PB can see what needs fixing or PB can just do a complete rewrite of the entire system ushering in the renaissance for PB that Kevin mentions in the link above where Kevin insults Jorel. As has been pointed out nothing will change because a few fans are happy with the status quo.

Often those closest to a problem are blind to it.
So no it is not a given that the PTBs should be aware of what "issues" there are with a system.
And no it is not because a few are satisfied with the way the system is currently.
It is because they speak with one voice.

Do you know how we got the current RUE casting rules? A huge majority spoke with ONE voice on the problem.
We got the current iteration of the -10 rule the same way. The majority spoke at length as a cohesive whole on what the problem was.
There is no consensus on what the problem with the current system actually is. You have hundreds of voices saying it needs scrapped, hundreds saying this group of rules needs "fixed", still more saying that group of rules, etc...
The Fans cannot agree in meaningful numbers as to exactly what they want.
So what if we think 80% of the fans want a change if we cannot even get 20% of them to agree on what to change?
Want to see a change? Then as group we have to come to a consensus on what kind of changes we would like to see.
Only then, maybe, will we see something done.

I doubt the hundreds and huuuundreds of voices... but your point is valid.

[Dreamstreamer]

Do you know how we got the current RUE casting rules? A huge majority spoke with ONE voice on the problem.
We got the current iteration of the -10 rule the same way. The majority spoke at length as a cohesive whole on what the problem was.

And the "G.I. Joe" rule? That was due to a cohesive and singular voice from the majority of the fan base, too?

There is no consensus on what the problem with the current system actually is. You have hundreds of voices saying it needs scrapped, hundreds saying this group of rules needs "fixed", still more saying that group of rules, etc...
The Fans cannot agree in meaningful numbers as to exactly what they want.
So what if we think 80% of the fans want a change if we cannot even get 20% of them to agree on what to change?
Want to see a change? Then as group we have to come to a consensus on what kind of changes we would like to see.

I'm not sure if there were "hundreds," but you are correct that there were competing voices. That said, would you have been happy if a super majority of people liking D20 had flooded in to those threads and agreed that D20 should be Palladium Books' system going forward? A majority speaking with one voice is not always the best way to make policy.

I do agree that open mike night at the forums might not have been the best way to approach system design. I was hoping that they saw something (anything?) they liked and wanted to use going forward. Or at least test the waters with further (much more specific) questions about particular designs and choices. That way they could gather useful feedback that addresses potential pros and cons rather than what amounts to "It's different; I hate it" or "I like System X, do it that way!"

Then again, the arguing over whether the rules for character creation and combat could even be followed as presented means that even a relatively simple word change for clarity is unlikely to get consensus from this group of "Fans," eh?

[Marcus]

A majority speaking with one voice is not always the best way to make policy.

When was the Dictatorship of the Proletariat ever wrong?