The Gaming Den

I was wondering when this would get made. Makes sense now that Wild Hunt is doing well.

http://thewitcher.com/news/view/1086

However... R Talsorian? Not who I'd expect to be given the IP. I guess it makes sense since CDPR licensed Cyberpunk.

Anyway, I'm trying to figure out aside from "moral ambiguity" and Mary Sue levels of superpowered Witchers & magic users what would be the pitch for the system. It almost seems like it'd make a better campaign setting for D&D or some other fantasy RPG than it would a stand-alone system.

Don't get me wrong, I love the IP and the books for what they are, but it doesn't seem to stand out as needing a home-cooked full RPG offering.

According to the comments there's probably a 2001 version that never was translated into English. Be interesting to read.

As far as a setting though, I'd be interested in a system for creating complex curses and stuff like that.

I... don't expect anything good to come out of it. Witcher is just not a good setting for an RPG. By lore, Witchers are OP loners, best swordsmen in the world with battle magic. Mages don't get much time in the books, but are usually nuclear strikes against everything that is not a witcher. And everyone else is playing WFRPG 1e.
In the games Geralt had amnesia after dying, was well below the level of a normal witcher for the majority of a series, and still was killing common folk like it's nothing. I just don't know what level of play is going to be supported, and if it will be in any way recognizable as the original series.

Yeah that's pretty much where I'm at with you. I don't see how it will work. One of the proposed character classes is literally like The King of Beggars where you have a network of thieves doing your work. How that interacts with Geralt in an ongoing party situation... well it doesn't in my head.

I'll wonder if they'll address all the knobbing in the books and stories.

TheFlatline wrote:According to the comments there's probably a 2001 version that never was translated into English. Be interesting to read.

There was - don't remember much about it other than it was mostly d6 rolls and wasn't too much of a success (the game was released alongside the Witcher movie*, which didn't really help).

Longes wrote:I... don't expect anything good to come out of it. Witcher is just not a good setting for an RPG. By lore, Witchers are OP loners, best swordsmen in the world with battle magic. Mages don't get much time in the books, but are usually nuclear strikes against everything that is not a witcher. And everyone else is playing WFRPG 1e.

Hey, it is almost like DnD (though it has a competent meele character ). But more seriously, I agree the setting doesn't lend itself to pen and paper RPGs. It works for single-player games, but that doesn't really count here...

*if you haven't heard about it, be happy - it is bad (some even described it as "showing all the things you shouldn't do if you want a good movie"), and not in a way that would make it good (like Ed Wood's stuff).

karpik777 wrote: *if you haven't heard about it, be happy - it is bad (some even described it as "showing all the things you shouldn't do if you want a good movie"), and not in a way that would make it good (like Ed Wood's stuff).

It seems to also have had a TV series as well:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hexer_(TV_series)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hexer_(film)


Here is a link about the old PnP RPG

http://witcher.wikia.com/wiki/Wied%C5%B ... ra%C5%BAni

It will teach you about Polish history

Leress wrote:It seems to also have had a TV series as well

I didn't mention it since I consider it even worse than the movie (as it wastes more of your time).

Speaking of these atrocities, remember Dandelion - aka the bard described to be young-looking and elven-like? The movie version captured those qualities in an... unique way.

Dandelion's on the right.

Though I guess since this is an elven king, he can be considered to look like a young elf...

Doesn't a Witcher RPG already exist though?

AcidBlades wrote:Doesn't a Witcher RPG already exist though?

That's has been mentioned in this thread.

karpik777 wrote:

Leress wrote:It seems to also have had a TV series as well

I didn't mention it since I consider it even worse than the movie (as it wastes more of your time).

Speaking of these atrocities, remember Dandelion - aka the bard described to be young-looking and elven-like? The movie version captured those qualities in an... unique way.

Dandelion's on the right.

Though I guess since this is an elven king, he can be considered to look like a young elf...

Considering all the tail Dandelion gets in the stories there's hope for me yet!

Netflix should pick the rights up and make a series out of it to compete with Game of Thrones. Just as much blood, guts, and T&A.

Anyone else remember when RTal was excited to announce the license to translate the official Japanese Gundam RPG to English, Fifteen years ago?

It's still not out.

The bits of the Witcher games that I liked best and felt were most unique were how
1. hunting monsters requires investigation and Vancian-style resource-preparation
2. many monsters tend to be created or summoned by human emotions

Everything else was just a lot of standard eurofantasy dross that could be replaced by other standard eurofantasy without anyone noticing. The political intrigue was fun, but it did not depend on the fact that Vizima is a city in Temeria or whatever.

I would totally play "Monster Hunter: The Witcherening", but I am not sure if a game set in the Witcher universe would be the best way to realize that desire.

Honestly, Witcherverse literally runs on ADnD 2E, with monsters and wizards toned way down (magic-users still wreck everybody's shit, because DnD), and Combat&Tactics allowed.

FatR wrote:Honestly, Witcherverse literally runs on ADnD 2E, with monsters and wizards toned way down (magic-users still wreck everybody's shit, because DnD), and Combat&Tactics allowed.

Most wizards are extremely long lived due to longevity potions. They also have monopoly on the stuff and do not share.
The wizards do not go on adventures. Some wizards can be encountered as end game bosses or criminals, but these exceptions are rarer than witchers.
The witchers, quite a few monsters are effects of human experimentations, gene splicing and eugenics. Actually, the witchers were created so that the wizards wouldn't be bothered with monsters and cleanups.

Healing magic exists, but it usually duplicates modern medicine. There are exceptions to this, but they are wizard-only.

So, an average party would consist of WFRP classes/careers . Hmm. WFRP would be pretty good at emulating the book.

Regards,
Ruemere

WFRPG would be an interesting approach actually.

Less gunpowder though.

Unfortunately, they are going with FUZION... and I have somewhat bad taste left after I tried it for Bubblegum Crises.

Regards,
Ruemere

PS. One has to remember that the whole Witcher saga started with a creative treatment of a fairy tale, with magic being unreliable toy, a cosmetic spice in a world of sharp arms. Only later Sapkowski added politics, ethnic purges and melancholic heroics.


Of course, one would have to make some severe adjustments to the game to ensure that a party balance is maintained. A Witcher would have to be a full 4-tier career, requiring monstrous amount of XP to complete, just like the trollslayers were.

Sapkowski is pretty explicit about him bieng tired of the Witcher, and only doing it (and changing the ending) for the money. Because Witcher is the only series of his that became popular.

Longes wrote:Sapkowski is pretty explicit about him bieng tired of the Witcher, and only doing it (and changing the ending) for the money. Because Witcher is the only series of his that became popular.

He says/said a lot of things. He's also quite frank about writing stuff for money.

To this day he wrote only one series. Narrenturm is a novel in three parts.
He wrote a lot of short stories, though, and some of them are excellent.

And his books do sell, though only he knows how well.

Personally, I prefer his short stories, like Golden Afternoon (Zlote Popoludnie), Musicians (Muzykanty) and In Bomb Crater (We leju po bombie).
They remind me of the best works of Henry Kuttner and Roger Zelazny as they take something quite familiar and turn it on its head.

Sapkowski reminds me of Zelazny

Them's fightin' words, matey!

Longes wrote:

Sapkowski reminds me of Zelazny

Them's fightin' words, matey!

Why? If anything, this means that Zelazny's legacy is still alive, despite attempts to bury it.
Also, while I cannot vouch for quality of translation, Sapkowski's quite an erudite, and he often pays homage to his predecessors.
Note that I prefer short forms.

Regards,
Ruemere

Longes wrote:Sapkowski is pretty explicit about him bieng tired of the Witcher, and only doing it (and changing the ending) for the money. Because Witcher is the only series of his that became popular.

Funny enough, even though he published another book in 2013, when Witcher the Game became popular, he kinda denies that he owes the renewed interest to the game.

Longes wrote:Sapkowski is pretty explicit about him bieng tired of the Witcher, and only doing it (and changing the ending) for the money. Because Witcher is the only series of his that became popular.

When did he change the ending?

Smirnoffico wrote:Funny enough, even though he published another book in 2013, when Witcher the Game became popular, he kinda denies that he owes the renewed interest to the game.

He generally seems somewhat bitter about the games - quite possibly because they became more popular than his own works.

ruemere wrote:Personally, I prefer his short stories, like Golden Afternoon (Zlote Popoludnie), Musicians (Muzykanty) and In Bomb Crater (We leju po bombie).

I have to agree - both for Witcher and Narrenturm I feel the further we go in, the lower the quality of the writing (and story) becomes.

karpik777 wrote:He generally seems somewhat bitter about the games - quite possibly because they became more popular than his own works.

A videogame more popular than a book? Is it 1995 already?

2015? Really? Has anyone told Sapkowski yet? Be gentle; I don't think he'll take it well.

karpik777 wrote:

Longes wrote:Sapkowski is pretty explicit about him bieng tired of the Witcher, and only doing it (and changing the ending) for the money. Because Witcher is the only series of his that became popular.

When did he change the ending?

His story, which the game trilogy is based on.

Smirnoffico wrote:

karpik777 wrote:

Longes wrote:Sapkowski is pretty explicit about him bieng tired of the Witcher, and only doing it (and changing the ending) for the money. Because Witcher is the only series of his that became popular.

When did he change the ending?

His story, which the game trilogy is based on.

What was changed? I can't find anything about that on Wikipedia, I recall Garalt being alive at the end of the books so that's not it. Is it about Ciri being a character in the third game? I haven't played.