Page 1 of 3
Terrible advice from gamebooks
Posted: Fri Apr 05, 2013 4:16 pm
by Prak
Spurred by the Scion review and need for a topic at the last minute, this publishing cycle for my school paper I've decided the topic for my column is "(Game) Companies that suck at their jobs." I will mention Maxis and Blizzard for their "Let's launch a game without enough resources to support our customer base!" dumbassery, but I'd also like to talk about tabletop games, since I've been far too heavy on video game talk for a person who doesn't play many video games.
So, what I'm asking you guys about is- What is the worst advice you've ever found in a game book/most egregious example of White Wolf/WotC/etc not knowing how to make a proper game?
Posted: Fri Apr 05, 2013 4:23 pm
by Ancient History
Well, the Wraeththu RPG had some advice about using BB guns for larping.
Posted: Fri Apr 05, 2013 4:26 pm
by angelfromanotherpin
GWs 'punchin' legal' advice is an excellent example, but I don't know if there's any actual documentation of that around.
Posted: Fri Apr 05, 2013 4:28 pm
by Ancient History
Oh, and there were the original ante rules in Magic: the Gathering.
Posted: Fri Apr 05, 2013 4:40 pm
by MisterDee
For RPGs:
The oWoD "metaplot" with Samuel Haight comes to mind. Making a significant chunk of your produced material dependent on letting a terribad designer self-insert/DMPC run amok is not a super idea.
For boardgames:
The epic fail that is the Arkham Horror rulebook (the rules are tolerable, but the rulebook itself explains them so poorly it's not even funny.) For one-product games that's not so bad, but for something like AH where you really want your buyers to get expansions and shit, it can cause lost sales if people just don't soldier on enough to learn the game.
Or the filthy, filthy lie that San Juan can be played with more than, maybe, three people. (San Juan's the one that gets on my nerves the most for that, but that problem is very common: there are just so many games that overestimate the number of players they can accomodate.)
Posted: Fri Apr 05, 2013 4:55 pm
by Maxus
Playtesting. Mechanical analysis.
A lot of game companies hate being told they did it wrong.
Video game companies are very pragmatic, because if something goes wrong, you can look at it and tell THAT guy isn't supposed to bent into a shape of a rubberband pretzel while his arms and legs spin at a super-high speed.
TTRPG writers are a lot pricklier, because you're not writing code which makes graphics and physics, you're writing ideas, and people hate being told their ideas suck, especially if they think they do great ideas.
Posted: Fri Apr 05, 2013 5:03 pm
by ishy
What about that dawizard incident at TSR?
Posted: Fri Apr 05, 2013 5:20 pm
by RobbyPants
Ancient History wrote:Oh, and there were the original ante rules in Magic: the Gathering.
I forgot all about those! I played for ante two or three times ever, and that was over half my life ago. I remember losing a card that I really didn't want to lose (but wasn't irreplaceable), then, when we're cutting for our cards the next game, the other guy cut to something like a Sengir Vampire and quickly stuffs it back in the deck and re-cuts. Those rules were made for making people hate each other.
ishy wrote:What about that dawizard incident at TSR?
Go on...
Posted: Fri Apr 05, 2013 6:07 pm
by echoVanguard
The "dawizard debacle" was a
global find/replace mishap at TSR.
echo
Posted: Fri Apr 05, 2013 6:10 pm
by CapnTthePirateG
Why has no one mentioned the Godawful advice chapter from Complete Mage?
Posted: Fri Apr 05, 2013 6:13 pm
by Username17
Supposedly a manuscript came in and had "mage" written in for all the character class titles. This was 2nd edition, so technically "Mage" was the class group, and the class was "Wizard". So a junior editor did a global find and replace and sent the galleys off to printing. "Damage" became "DaWizard".
Supposedly it affects a 16 page printing chunk of Encyclopedia Magica, Volume 1.
-Username17
Posted: Fri Apr 05, 2013 6:45 pm
by zugschef
GM: It's a hit. Please roll for dawizard.
PC: *rolls* Fifteen points of dawizard!
GM: Ah sorry, forgot to roll the miss-chance due to the wizard's active mirror image spell. *rolls* Sorry, you only hit one of the wizard's iwizards. So the evil wizard's got two iwizards left for a one in three chance to actually hit the wizard and not one of the iwizards and deal dawizard to the wizard.
Posted: Fri Apr 05, 2013 6:48 pm
by ishy
Posted: Fri Apr 05, 2013 6:50 pm
by Josh_Kablack
A similar editing incident happened with an Ars Magica edition.
In Ars Magica, the material component needed to make long-lasting magical effects is called Vis - always italicized in print, taken from the latin root word, and generally pronounced something like "weese" by ArM players.
A global find/replace resulted in cloaks of inVisabilitiy and other nonsense.
And then there're are also the legendary directives to "see page XX" that White Wolf was famous for leaving in the majority of their pre-200 final published books.
****
But as to the more general topic I would suggest a quick trolling of BGG forums for games companies and designers people hate and big-hype Kickstarters which haven't delivered.
Posted: Fri Apr 05, 2013 7:13 pm
by hogarth
In Villains & Vigilantes, you were supposed to generate ability scores based on your real life capabilities and you were supposed to get your friends to make up the numbers.
Um, no thanks.
Posted: Fri Apr 05, 2013 7:53 pm
by Jefepato
hogarth wrote:In Villains & Vigilantes, you were supposed to generate ability scores based on your real life capabilities and you were supposed to get your friends to make up the numbers.
Um, no thanks.
...I played in a game once where everyone had stats generated based on the others' opinions. Or possibly just on the opinions of whoever was there to do the stats, which was not me.
I wish I still had my character sheet. It was hilarious. Everyone else had combat skills, not me (there was one guy there who could justify such skills, no one else). For bonus points we were using the Alternity system, which I am not sure I ever understood.
Posted: Fri Apr 05, 2013 8:09 pm
by Prak
I've done two games like that. The first was a crappily structured "we're playing ourselves with a splat applied" WoD game, where you had to discuss and defend the dots you were giving yourself. Because of the way skills are described, I was able to get a dot or two of firearms, because I've been to a shooting range all of once.
The other was... fuck, I can't recall. I think it was actually just an exercise/experiment where each player wrote stats for the others, and then we went through them.
Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 1:57 am
by Koumei
zugschef wrote:Please roll for dawizard.
"Da wizard can roll for himself! E's da best wizard!"
you only hit one of the wizard's iwizards.
Is the iWizard the next shitty mac product? Wait, the iWizard is the 4E Wizard, isn't it? Looks pretty, can't do any of the stuff a proper Wizard does!
Anyway, Complete Mage gives awful advice on what sort of spells to take (note that you're better off with "D&D for Dummies", which tells you Sleep and Colour Spray are the go-to spells of level 1). And White Wolf has a thing in all their books of "Feel free to ignore the dice results if you like your idea better." One of the 8,004 universal systems out there seriously does say that the dice shouldn't get in the way of the story and implies you should only ever roll for things that aren't actually important.
I hesitate to mention Page 5 of Warmachine, but I just did. So... BALLS! MANLY BALLS! MADE OF METAL! HEAVY METAL MANLY BALLS!
Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 2:05 am
by Prak
While this is all pretty terrible advice, I was thinking more of examples of self defeating advice. We all know damned well that most gamers will over look, or even seriously not notice bad advice of this sort, or even be forgiving of typos. But what about companies actually defeating themselves?
Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 6:00 am
by Username17
While Guardians of Order was busily imploding from having taken on too many licenses and being unable to put out products quickly enough to pay their licensing fees, causing them to have to cut back staff, causing them to be even more unable to put out enough products to justify their licensing fees, until they had circled the drain enough and vanished as a company, they decided to start putting a "manifesto" on all their books. Here it is:
Guardians of Order, RPG Manifesto wrote:These rules are written on paper, not etched in stone tablets.
Rules are suggested guidelines, not required edicts.
If the rules don't say you can't do something, you can.
There are no official answers, only official opinions.
When dice conflict with the story, the story always wins.
Min/Maxing and Munchkinism aren't problems with the game; they're problems with the player.
The Game Master has full discretionary power over the game.
The Game Master always works with, not against, the players.
A game that is not fun is no longer a game - it's a chore.
This book contains the answers to all things.
When the above does not apply, make it up.
It's incredibly shitty. I mean, how many consumer products include a manifesto stating that problems with using the consumer product are problems with the user and you're welcome to make your own damn product now that we have your money? Obviously: this didn't save the company.
-Username17
Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 8:08 pm
by Wiseman
I remember one specific thing from Infernum: Book of the Damned that was hilarious to read. Keep in mind that this probably isn't an exact quote but...
Book of the Damned wrote:A demon's iliaster requirement increases by one at every level. Thus a demon must make the decision between advancing in power, and being certain of having enough iliaster to feed it's self.
It freaking wants you to actually consider that not leveling up is a decent option!
Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 8:33 pm
by Red_Rob
Well so soon after reading the Wraeththu reviews this certainly stuck in the mind:
Wraeththu wrote:Unfortunately, sex and sexuality are, for many people, a very embarrassing subject, and not one they really want to discuss while doing a hobby, especially when their mother may be in the next room. However, in a game of Wraeththu the subject must be broached somehow, after all the characters' lives quite literally may depend on it.
In Wraeththu you cannot ignore the whole aspect of character sexuality.
...
Love triangles and dark passionate pasts are a staple of fiction, and can only improve your game.
...
Most of our time in the real world is taken up with the pursuit of love and sex, so how can our characters be so ambivalent towards such issues? In most other role-playing games such issues are optional, but in Wraeththu they are essential.
...
In fact, one of the things that may have drawn your players to Wraeththu is the unique opportunity for such a role-playing experience.
...
As a storyteller you can assume the characters are taking Aruna with each other, simply as often as they have to. You still need to actually mention what is going on though, not ignore the act completely. Simply say "So once in the inn you all take Aruna and wake up the next morning."
(PURPLEXVI'S EXPLANATION: Aruna = Wraeththu boning, Wraeththu need to get their alien/mutant boners on or they die.)
With everyone aware that Aruna is going on, it becomes easier to take the next step.
When you are comfortable, you can move to the second level. Here you ask the characters to pick partners for Aruna. They still need only explain who and when rather than how and what they like. However, sex and relationships are now part of the game.
...
All characters need to do at this stage is specify which character(s) they are taking Aruna with, and(perhaps more importantly) who they are not. This develops relationships in the game as well as sex.
The third level brings more role-play into the activities mentioned above. Now it isn't enough to say what is going on, now you must describe it as well. It is essential at this point for characters to take on Aruna as an essential part of playing their characters. At this point you can bring sex magic into the mix as well.
...
By now the players should feel comfortable with theri characters taking Aruna and describing the way they like to do such things. Are they gentle or harsh? Do they prefer Soume or Ouana? (PURPLEXVI'S NOTE: This is basically "DOES YOUR SEA ANEMONE BECOME A PROUD SCHLONG OR A HORRIFYING PSEUDO-VAGINA?"). Is Aruna like an itch they like to scratch or a sacred spiritual union? Do they like it a lot, or not so much, and how do they treat their partners afterwards?
The last level allows you to be as graphic as you like. You can now bring in elements such as pelki(PURPLEXVI'S NOTE: surprise sex. When raping humans, Wraeththu sex sludge kills 'em) and all the darker sides of sex and Aruna. This need not be restricted to the NPCs either. Players should feel free to create quite nasty or sexually predatory characters, if they so desire. The storyteller is now able to bring in NPCs designed purely for sexual storylines and adventures. Such NPCs can act as sexual foils for characters, forming jealousies and love triangles in established relationships.
...
Don't get fixated on sex, as it can easily dominate a game.
Let's play Creepy Phone Sex - The Game!
I'm almost tempted to try to slip this into our next D&D session just to see the look on everyone's faces...
Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 8:41 pm
by darkmaster
Wiseman wrote:I remember one specific thing from Infernum: Book of the Damned that was hilarious to read. Keep in mind that this probably isn't an exact quote but...
Book of the Damned wrote:A demon's iliaster requirement increases by one at every level. Thus a demon must make the decision between advancing in power, and being certain of having enough iliaster to feed it's self.
It freaking wants you to actually consider that not leveling up is a decent option!
Pretty sure that's Demons at large, the kind who don't really get to have covenants, or whatever they're called I can't be fucked to remember, and instead get enslaved, and not PCs who are assumed to make money like any D20 PCs and therefore have what they need to keep in that sweet, sweet soul juice.
Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2013 8:57 pm
by silva
For me, it was the late 80s/early 90s with the "storytelling" wave (maybe originating with Dragonlance and Vampire ?) whose books more or less adviced for structuring adventures as linear stories/chronicles, resulting in a lot of GMs inviting the group to told them their stories, and if a player strayed from the scripted path it was bad form on the player part. Fuck it.
Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 12:51 pm
by ishy
I remember the Rules Compendium having some terrible advice / houserules etc.
I'll go through it quickly.
Page #12: splitting the Appraise skill in 6 different skills because of RAELMSI
Page #52: falling dmg should have the same chance of killing your character because of ISMLEAR
Page #148: talking about how much of a powergamer and minmaxxer you are if you are dual wielding, take weapon focus and then wield the exact same weapons to benefit from weapon focus on both weapons!
Huh some actual good advice in there too. More good than bad overall I think. Like say telling you (#44) that you should probably just ignore the lockpicking skill that is only in the 3e game because of 2e legacy mechanics. And advice to just ignore use rope (#50)
Guess last time I shouldn't have thought fuck it at page 12.
Special note: #147 Mearls talking about how at a convention game, he played an evil cleric and then betrayed the party.
Mearls is such a dick.