The Gaming Den

When was the Dark Age of the hobby for you ?

For me its coincidental to NBA Golden Age, that is, from mid 80s to mid 90s. It was the era where games got unnecessarily complex and where adventuring advice and modules got extremely linear, with the mindset "GM brings its story for players to follow" getting commonplace. Fortunately, D&D3e and indie-games rose up in early 2000 to put an end to that trend.

For me it's right now, where D&D is explicitly being farmed out just often enough to keep the copyright, Pathfinder refuses to improve anything, Shadowrun 5e is a trainwreck, and "all White Wolf" is one guy renting IP from EVE Online.

Yeah, I kind of agree with you Omegon. Today it seems to me like we have a regression in the hobby. DnD, Shadowrun, Dark Heresy, Warhammer Fantasy (or the new Age of Yawnmar) the quality keeps dropping.

Maybe I'm not exposed to enough games

I agree that right now is as bad as I've ever seen the scene.

Pathfinder is a giant rotting carcass bloated with the gasses of its own putrefaction, everything else is shitty rules-lacking shit games and/or pet projects by talentless designers.

Hell, even Call of Cthulhu 7th is a kickstarter clusterfuck.

Mm I would argue that while the mainstream giants are definitely flagging, the indie market is booming.

Sure it's still in its rough and unpolished infancy but there are still some gems out there. And the bad stuff tends more towards "hilariously bad" rather than boring bad (though there is still a lot of that).

As someone who system hops a lot even with the old standbys I feel like I'm spoiled for choice.

shinimasu wrote:Mm I would argue that while the mainstream giants are definitely flagging, the indie market is booming.

This.

About the mainstream giants flagging, I don't know. I don't see Shadowrun 5e any more shitty than 4e, and I definitely see D&D5e better than 4e. Call of Cthulhu isn't a giant for a long time now, and World of Darkness kept itself stable with 20V editions and now is coming back with Vampire 4e. Oh and Numenera and The Strange are doing pretty well, whatever you opt to call it indie or mainstream.

Add me to the 'right now' crowd.
What good games are there to play?

In my experience indie game booms lead to that one guy in the group bringing a bunch of shit to the table that never sticks. Since the last Pathfinder campaign ended my current group has been spinning its wheels and plays naught but MTG and other board or deck building games. And honestly? I'd rather try a different board game every week than system hop ttrpgs. Call it anecdotal if you want, but this state of affairs seems to hold over to my FLGS--they've got a pathfinder group or two that shows up irregularly, otherwise it's all about the card games.

While I overall agree with you Whipstitch, I might actually be ok with hopping TTRPGs each week if we were explicitly doing Nexus World, and I was in a group that had a high degree of system competency. Not necessarily mastery, since we'd be changing systems so much, but a game like that would need people who were highly competent at systems in general so all the converting could be done.

I might also be ok with a sort of string of one shots, but that would almost necessitate 8+hour gaming marathons every week, and most people I know aren't unemployed enough to do that.

But, yeah, I'd say we're in the Dark Ages. Up to about 2000, the designers were learning and things were progressing. Sure, 2nd Ed had a lot of shit design, and all that, but calling that the Dark Ages is like calling the period in your life when you're shitting in your pants and being manually fed by other people the Dark Ages of your life. The first time it happens is a stage you move through. It's when you return to that stage that it's the Dark Ages.

So with design quality and rules progress level regressing despite us knowing better know, with more and more advice being "wing it*" and "tie your players to a train," we're in the "Dark Ages of the Hobby" now.


*Wing It is fine advice to an experienced GM. It's terrible advice to a newbie because they don't have the knowledge base to work from.

I'd say now as well.

In spite of all the indie stuff coming out, I don't see anything on shelves at the handful of stores that deign to even carry RPG stuff anymore.

There's a scattershot smattering of DnD(5e, 4e, 3e, 2e... depending on the store [I totally found a complete box set for ADnD BATTLESYSTEM for sale]), completely random Pathfinder books, maybe a Shadowrun book...

One of the regulars posted that his FLGS boss showed him revenue from MtG vs RPG supplements... and I have a feeling that carries over to everything. Not only is revenue in RPGs small but now it's spread all over the place. It's almost akin to the problem comics have. People already invested in a series (game line) will want to invest in the newest comic (splat book), but people new to the hobby will be reluctant to pick up established titles and there are a ton of new titles that may or may not be a flash in the pan (regardless of quality).

Meanwhile MtG keeps chugging along.

edit: Not to mention the absolute boom in board games because of Kickstarter. My gaming group has largely moved to board games each weekend.

I don't see a single goddam thing in the indy scene that is worthwhile. It is all either "Here is my special new mechanic I like (that is fucking garbage) and a game built around it" or "Here is some other mechanic with the numbers filed off, and attached to a movie/book/TVshow setting that doesn't actually fit games well, and the mechanics also don't fit the setting" and/or "HEY GUYS WOULDN'T EVERYTHING BE BETTER WITHOUT ALL THOSE RULES? FUCK RULES AM I RIGHT?"

Now.

D&D has suicided, Pathfinder is the same bloated mess that 3.5 was but worse, I haven't heard anything good about Shadowrun 5e, and people are too scared to try anything new after D&D 4e flopped.

I wouldn't call this a Dark Age. Sure there's not a lot of good product being produced (HEX is about it, and their production schedule is slower than D&D, as it is a part-time gig for them), but some old stuff is still good stuff and we've had a decade or more to whip up house rules.

Even Pathfinder at least is keeping fantasy RPGs alive until something better than 3.5 comes along. I'd take the 80's as a worse time. I mean, I had to actually keep my filthy RPG habit a secret from some relatives thanks to the stupid satanic paranoia. Finding people to play with was friggin hard, you pretty much had to train your own group.

You kids don't know how good you have it, even now. Yadda, yadda, yadda.

Sure, we have some acceptable things. Hell, the actual Dark Ages gave rise to.... ok, I'm sure there was something good that happened in the dark ages. My point was that we are in a Dark Ages of the hobby because things are regressing. Sure, we can play old shit, and we don't have to hide it (except ask fbmf what it's like in the South), but the hobby is actually going backwards.

We're in a "Dark Age" of the hobby.

Prak wrote:While I overall agree with you Whipstitch, I might actually be ok with hopping TTRPGs each week if we were explicitly doing Nexus World, and I was in a group that had a high degree of system competency. Not necessarily mastery, since we'd be changing systems so much, but a game like that would need people who were highly competent at systems in general so all the converting could be done.

I doubt such setups are terribly practical. Learning a new system can be fun, but introducing them on the regular is loads of work for the MC(s). There'd be an obvious temptation to stick with games that people are already familiar with to ease the overhead, at which point the group doesn't get the thrill of the new in the first place.

True. Just a thought I had. Honestly, if you want to play Nexus World, you really want to pick a single system that can handle lots of settings, like d20, Mutants and Masterminds, or Gurps, and you need actual system mastery in at least one person to handle what happens when you hop to a new world.

CapnTthePirateG wrote:Now.

D&D has suicided, Pathfinder is the same bloated mess that 3.5 was but worse

How is it worse?

The most rational argument I've heard for that is "PF isn't compatible with my personal 3.X houserules where I auto-ban X, Y, and Z and nerf A, B and C and buff H, G and L and add O, P, M", which is kinda of a valid argument when you're a veteran diehard player, but is a really shitty argument if you're a newbie or casual player/DM.

Plus PF offers a free srd with most of their material neatly organized, making the life of new DMs and players a lot easier. Casters got their top stuff cut down by default, mundanes even get the maneuver system in the srd now. Bloated? Yes. Messy? Not. At least not when compared with 3.5's "manually search through that stack of books for one feat/spell/item".

And no, don't give me the "players and DM held their hands and singed in harmony all the time in 3.5" crap. There was a whole toxic community that promoted that the players should do their best to sneak in the best OP combos they could in order to destroy campaigns. They weren't just theoretical builds, they were employed in games and I had to deal with more than my unfair share of people like those (3.5 psionics I'm looking at you, balanced my ass).

The reason it sucks for 3.5 vets is because of the countless tiny changes and lack of a guide to said changes. Any given thing may work exactly like it did in 3.5, or completely differently.

The reason it sucks for newbies is that it has all the imbalance and trap options of 3.5, and more that Paizo added into it.

maglag wrote:And no, don't give me the "players and DM held their hands and singed in harmony all the time in 3.5" crap. There was a whole toxic community that promoted that the players should do their best to sneak in the best OP combos they could in order to destroy campaigns. They weren't just theoretical builds, they were employed in games and I had to deal with more than my unfair share of people like those (3.5 psionics I'm looking at you, balanced my ass).

This part makes me think you are an idiot. Do you even know what forum you are on?

Also, 3.5 psionics isn't even fucking broken. It is objectively worse than being a Wizard with about 3/4ths of a brain.

Prak wrote:Sure, we have some acceptable things. Hell, the actual Dark Ages gave rise to.... ok, I'm sure there was something good that happened in the dark ages. My point was that we are in a Dark Ages of the hobby because things are regressing. Sure, we can play old shit, and we don't have to hide it (except ask fbmf what it's like in the South), but the hobby is actually going backwards.

We're in a "Dark Age" of the hobby.

What options to play did you have that you don't have now? I'll grant you that I lost my Living Greyhawk and now would have to play Pathfinder Society to get my d20 3.x on with strangers easily. But I don't have to do that since I have a regular game night and we do fine.

The amount of games available is not regressing, just the quality and abundance of new ones. It makes sense that when you have a lot of good options already available, it makes it harder for new shit to break in, especially when they come with both the time-cost of learning and the monetary cost of purchase.

It's progressing, but just much more slowly.

Give it another month and I'll have a Rifts version you can actually play and enjoy.

Omegonthesane wrote:For me it's right now, where D&D is explicitly being farmed out just often enough to keep the copyright, Pathfinder refuses to improve anything, Shadowrun 5e is a trainwreck, and "all White Wolf" is one guy renting IP from EVE Online.

I predict that tabletop RPGs will be even fewer and further between 10 years from now. So what one step down from the Dark Ages? The Slightly Darker Than Dark Ages?

erik wrote:

Prak wrote:Sure, we have some acceptable things. Hell, the actual Dark Ages gave rise to.... ok, I'm sure there was something good that happened in the dark ages. My point was that we are in a Dark Ages of the hobby because things are regressing. Sure, we can play old shit, and we don't have to hide it (except ask fbmf what it's like in the South), but the hobby is actually going backwards.

We're in a "Dark Age" of the hobby.

What options to play did you have that you don't have now? I'll grant you that I lost my Living Greyhawk and now would have to play Pathfinder Society to get my d20 3.x on with strangers easily. But I don't have to do that since I have a regular game night and we do fine.

The amount of games available is not regressing, just the quality and abundance of new ones. It makes sense that when you have a lot of good options already available, it makes it harder for new shit to break in, especially when they come with both the time-cost of learning and the monetary cost of purchase.

It's progressing, but just much more slowly.

Give it another month and I'll have a Rifts version you can actually play and enjoy.

Yeah, and people were making steam automatons in the actual Dark Ages, and could sail everywhere they could have before them. What's your point?

We're approaching this question with two entirely different definitions of "Dark Age." If you're going to define a Dark Age by fewer available options, then it's questionable whether there could ever be a Dark Age. Books get burned and kingdoms fall apart, but short of a nuclear holocaust, the options are always there, especially for the people who know the options.

The definition I'm using is closer to that which gave rise to the actual period of history called the Dark Ages, a period of "cultural and economic deterioration." The Industry is fucked, design is a deep dark sucking pit, and the culture of those designers which informs both the aforementioned deep sucking pit, and the advice they put forth, is derelict.

It used to be that the two biggest games were Dungeons and Dragons and World of Darkness, two mighty kingdoms, if you will. One may have been presided over by the Pontiff Gygax, and the other by the Monarch Rein*Hagen, and other games were merely baronies that were fed by those, or were tiny bandit kingdoms that were mere annoyances to them. Now, White Wolf has collapsed, and only lives on in the form of a pretender last scion, and Dungeons and Dragons is not even a shadow of it's former glory, with what amounts to an evil, incompetent vizier sitting in it's crumbling throne, while mercenary generals do all its real work.

I can tell the original question of this thread is rather disingenuous (because history is not a matter of opinion, and I don't appreciate silva trying to act like a religious nut who thinks facts are opinion).

Anyway, I agree we're in a state of regression. To any consolation, there's Shadow of the Demon Lord, which while I'm weary of its connotations, I do applaud its desire to be short. Through the Breach, is another game that intends to be short (5 sessions per player), and its "new" to our area, so my group has gotten excited for that. Its using Poker Cards based RNG as its gimmick, based on its pre-existing miniatures game, so I'm unsure how good/bad that kind of RNG is.

Alas Vegas (If it ever comes out) will be a similar interesting diversion. I would call it more of a story game than an rpg, but, eh, that's semantics. It has a definite plot, and lasts four sessions, using a tarot deck as an RNG and imagery generator. It'll also have a fantasy storyline and, I think, one other storyline for the same system.

But, it funded in Feb 2013, and Wallis has taken on another project in that time, so I'm not exactly holding my breath for that $60 hardback...