Magic as a D&D Edition Setting

[Blicero]

Honestly, I like Eberron. The hidden numbers for things like population and shit are totally off, but as a steampunk setting, it's not that bad. I will admit that the implementation of warforged was rather off, but I have no problem with robot PCs. I feel the completely opposite about changelings, though. Koumei's "IT BREEDS TRUE!!!" comment is completely spot on, but simply having a race that can innately disguise itself tends to make for fun pulp stories.

WotC should've gone for more of a nonmedieval feel, though. I base the vibe more off a "preWWI Howl's Moving Castle"-esque vibe. And it tends to work pretty well.

[Ganbare Gincun]

Magic The Gathering has all of the elements for a great RPG game. And tying D&D to it would probably result in a flood of new players to replace the grognards that are/will dying off. But they had better make sure that their rules set is pimp-tight, or else the whole thing will backfire and blow up in their face. But if the rules are good, I think that everyone will eventually come around and start playing 5E.

And I have no problems with people playing robots, insects, lizards, hyena men, or whatever. Bring on the freak legion.

[hogarth]

Magic The Gathering has all of the elements for a great RPG game. And tying D&D to it would probably result in a flood of new players to replace the grognards that are/will dying off.

I suppose it's possible. But I wonder how many Magic players really care about the game world "fluff". I know I didn't give a rat's ass when I (occasionally) played. I couldn't tell you who Urza was (some artifact dude?) or who the Phyrexians were (some evil dudes?) if my life depending on it.

[Ganbare Gincun]

What would be the difference between Warrior, Soldier, and Knight?

[Koumei]

And I have no problems with people playing robots, insects, lizards, hyena men, or whatever. Bring on the freak legion. :lol:

Hey now, I'm fine with people playing Illithid Knights mounted on Beholders. Seriously, I'm all for freak legion, the only thing in that list I object to is robots.

[Username17]

What would be the difference between Warrior, Soldier, and Knight?

Same as the differences between any martial classes, really. They get different abilities. And no, I do not think that combing through card abilities is going to be particularly useful since the games are on such radically different scales (although I suspect people would like it if they could get some ability called "First Strike" for Knights). Knights are going to include a bunch of Paladin-esque abilities, such as magical protection, burst smiting, and ally defending. The Soldier is going to want a bunch of Martial/Warlord abilities, such as rallying cries, tactical synergy, and leadership. The Warrior would be the "other" sword using class, the one you took if you didn't want to specialize. The kind of generalist a lot of people think the Fighter is now.

-Username17

[Prak]

Magic The Gathering has all of the elements for a great RPG game. And tying D&D to it would probably result in a flood of new players to replace the grognards that are/will dying off. But they had better make sure that their rules set is pimp-tight, or else the whole thing will backfire and blow up in their face. But if the rules are good, I think that everyone will eventually come around and start playing 5E.

And I have no problems with people playing robots, insects, lizards, hyena men, or whatever. Bring on the freak legion.

Sure


savage genitalia and absurd Balefire munchkin combos allowed?

What would be the difference between Warrior, Soldier, and Knight?

A knight comes from a vaguely feudal society with a strong military and disciplined culture, a soldier is just a guy from a standing army, a warrior is the guy from Podunk who knows how to kick ass and take names, and does so at the behest of Podunk. usually.

But also they'd be discerned by abilities, like Frank said. And yes, I think it'd be important, from a marketing standpoint, to give abilities that feel similar and are named after card abilities.

oh, and on the robots, Warforged are no more robots than golems are, they're just small, autonomous golems (ie, magical constructs). Hell, in a lot of fantasy, magic is technology, just under a different name, and different methodology.

[TavishArtair]

Magic The Gathering has all of the elements for a great RPG game. And tying D&D to it would probably result in a flood of new players to replace the grognards that are/will dying off.

I suppose it's possible. But I wonder how many Magic players really care about the game world "fluff". I know I didn't give a rat's ass when I (occasionally) played. I couldn't tell you who Urza was (some artifact dude?) or who the Phyrexians were (some evil dudes?) if my life depending on it.

WotC has become increasingly aware that there are some people who collect the cards almost entirely for the setting details and art. They have even given these gamers(?) a nickname of sorts to help in their marketing discussion. People may be familiar with the idea that there are "Timmy" or "Johnny" or "Spike" players, but they also will occasionally refer to the people who just collect cards for appreciating the game as "Vorthos" (for the art) or "Melvin" (for the rules - one could argue that the Den has a few of these, but not for Magic necessarily).

So, yes. An RPG tie in has its own whole subdemographic type thing going on. It would sell its first book. But whether the second book would sell? There is the question. Mark Rosewater has once noted that his design and development is about marketing. Because the thing that sells the game the most is itself. The second booster is sold by the first booster... and so on. And that is true of D&D too.

[Prak]

It's a terrible truth that an RPG the character mechanics of which were sold in booster pack form (classes, powers, etc.), with a mechanic that allowed you to build your character much as you would build a deck, would be a fucking money press. You'd have people buying specific combos, people trying to collect an entire set so they have all the rules, people who collect themed rulecards, and people that are just addicted to buying boosters. Priced reasonably, they'd even be an impulse buy item at a lot of places.

This is possibly the strongest reason to make most information about a game fit on a card.

[Lago PARANOIA]

While I'm sure that there might be some money in moving everything to a collectable card structure, the idea of booster packs for powers is completely insane for a cooperative roleplaying game. For one is the powers in the booster pack are relatively equal, just randomized, people are going to get pissed that they might have to drop an extra 20 dollars just to get Flame Pulse for their wizard; if you do shit like uncommon/common/rare then people will scream like raped apes that people are able to buy extra power. Then the munchkins, the only people who'll like this scheme, will also scream like raped apes when DMs ban the more powerful cards from their games.

tl;dr Touhou fancards good, YGO cards bad.

[Username17]

Yeah, the power cards for Gamma World offend people. The random minis boxes offended people too. There are many mechanics, storylines, and art pieces that can be profitably swindled from M:tG, but its sales structure will never fit D&D or any cooperative storytelling game.

-Username17

[Prak]

I wasn't saying it was a good idea mechanically, just financially. It'd be interesting to see, but... basically what you'd have to do is make a role playing card game, where the rules are simple enough for people to remember, and the cards are your sole form of character creation, then people who played would basically be forced to buy the cards* which would likely come in organized packs like magic cards.

*or use proxies. The proxy thing is difficult to get away with in a card game. Less so in this kind of set up.

[Starmaker]

*or use proxies. The proxy thing is difficult to get away with in a card game. Less so in this kind of set up.

There's an article on the origins of M:tG where they say they'd never expected players to organize and compile lists of cards. The game having been "solved" collectively was what made the creators realize editions had to be cycled in and out for gameplay reasons.

The modern 12+yr. Magic player plans a deck using a database, then buys the cards he needs. A TTRPG player would plan their character, then print everything out and be ready to start the game, because there'll be no pressure to buy cards outside of RPGA. After all, you can look at awesome fantasy art online all you want.

Note: I'll never forgive myself for missing this.

[Lago PARANOIA]

Speaking of Gamma World, everything I've heard about it made the thing come off as a panned flop with little non-fanboy appeal. Why is D&D trying to revive that setting? I could see why they attempted with Dark Sun, but Gamma World?

[Sashi]

As far as I can tell, it was so they could implement a gonzo ruleset under the guise of high weirdness.

[Username17]

Speaking of Gamma World, everything I've heard about it made the thing come off as a panned flop with little non-fanboy appeal. Why is D&D trying to revive that setting? I could see why they attempted with Dark Sun, but Gamma World?

There is a certain appeal of Gamma World. It's "zany". You can do "whatever" and it won't violate the setting or offend people. So from a design standpoint, it certainly has appeal. You have a canvas that you can really go apeshit on and no one will cluck their tongues about how you "went too far" or some shit. Also, Andy Collins was a big Gamma World fan and his early WotC writing was the Alternity version of Gamma World before they let him sit at the big kids table and write for 3e D&D.

But here's the deal: the problem wasn't that the writing crew they have wasn't allowed to go far enough or think big enough. It's that they fucking suck. They bad at their jobs. Also: while Gamma World holds fond memories for Andy Collins because it was his big break, he got that break because Gamma World is very minor and if he had fucked it up no one would have cared. And no one really cares about their new Gamma World either.

So their big insight was to trot out booster card packs where you could literally buy random powers and mutations and shit to use in the actual game. This is fucking stupid, because the RPG community wants tables of that crap rather than having their games physically limited by what they happen to have purchased and remembered to carry to the game. So the Gamma World thing is crap, and even the positive reviews of it basically come down to this:

Anything where you can roll low and have your arms shrivel into nothing is good in my book.

-Username17

[JigokuBosatsu]

There is a certain appeal of Gamma World. It's "zany".
-Username17

Man, I am realizing just how nerdy I used to be. We had 1st ed Gamma World, and actually played it. Well, pretty much every adventure ended with PCs getting abducted by aliens, but whatever...

Though much later, in high school, I remember we had a late night Vampire game that nobody wanted to MC. I volunteered, had people make characters, then said "You wake up in vats." I basically turned each clan into a specific variety of mutant and they all had to escape this creepy scientist's underground bunker, into the... oh, dammit. Post-apocalyptic wasteland.

[Severian]

MTG rotates their setting every year. Wouldn't that cause problems for a D&D setting based on one of their worlds(a setting which presumably would have to be supported for years?)

[Leress]

MTG rotates their setting every year. Wouldn't that cause problems for a D&D setting based on one of their worlds(a setting which presumably would have to be supported for years?)

I would assume it would be like it is now. DnD had Forgotten Realms, Eberron, Grayhawk, Dragonlance, etc. Everytime Magic/Dnd would make a new setting they can just add it to the pile, while still making books for the others.

[Severian]

I would assume it would be like it is now. DnD had Forgotten Realms, Eberron, Grayhawk, Dragonlance, etc. Everytime Magic/Dnd would make a new setting they can just add it to the pile, while still making books for the others.

From what I understand, the purpose of a mtg setting, aside from piggybacking on people who know what they're doing, would be to draw in mtg players. But magic players are used to getting a new setting every year, and might lose interest. Individual settings might not have a good shelf life.

Unless this topic is more about stealing the mtg setting as a whole, letting people play planeswalkers and travel across the multiverse. I can get behind that, but it would probably have to be structured as a wholly original MTG RPG, and not a continuation of D&D.

[Lokathor]

If I wanted to get into Gamma World and try it out, which edition would be considered best?

Unless this topic is more about stealing the mtg setting as a whole, letting people play planeswalkers and travel across the multiverse. I can get behind that, but it would probably have to be structured as a wholly original MTG RPG, and not a continuation of D&D.

Planescape++?

[Username17]

M:tG's handling of setting is incredibly sophisticated. Here's the rough outline of how it works:

• Every year they have a main storyline and a focused-on world that they produce a three-set block for. The world in question is different each year, but they go back and reuse the world from about 6 years ago fairly often.
• They change the "basic set" every year, and have little shout-outs to various worlds in each year's basic set.

So, if you were doing it this year, you would bring out like 3 books based in Mirrodin spaced throughout the year. And next year there would be no Mirrodin books, but there would be like 3 Lorwyn books or something. But you'd also throw some Mirrodin references and boxed text into next year's Monster Manual and other "basic set" expansion books.

-Username17

[Severian]

So, if you were doing it this year, you would bring out like 3 books based in Mirrodin spaced throughout the year. And next year there would be no Mirrodin books, but there would be like 3 Lorwyn books or something. But you'd also throw some Mirrodin references and boxed text into next year's Monster Manual and other "basic set" expansion books.

-Username17

That conflicts with the D&D business model in several ways. Plenty of people are going to cry foul about D&D ripping off magic, as has already been mentioned. Not everyone is going to buy into the setting du jour if it only has three books of material behind it, with substantial support unlikely to follow. They've got the race/class creature types and such, but in magic, those guys are the d-listers. They get summoned, get turned sideways, and die. People will want to play as planeswalkers, because planeswalkers are cool and if you aren't a 'walker the game can't take advantage of the possibilities interplanar travel provides. The way a MTG-based RPG works wouldn't really gel with the way D&D works.

You've got a salient point, though. The more I think about Magic: the rpg, the more I like it. I can't believe wizards hasn't realized this already.

[Ice9]

Koumei's "IT BREEDS TRUE!!!" comment is completely spot on

I never got the "it breeds true!" complaints about Eberron. Two races work that way. One (Lycanthropes) is actually a template applied to a human, so it's not all that odd that it can produce offspring. The other is Doppelgangers, the poster-boy for protean mutability. If anything could breed true with another race, it would be them.

Now compare that to Half-Elves and Half-Orcs, which have pretty much no justification at all. And yet nobody whines about settings that include those. Settings like ... almost all of them!

[angelfromanotherpin]

Now compare that to Half-Elves and Half-Orcs, which have pretty much no justification at all. And yet nobody whines about settings that include those. Settings like ... almost all of them!

Those specific examples go to Tolkien, where men, elves, orcs and hobbits are all just subspecies of the larger human species. But actual mythology is full of much crazier examples of crossbreeding.