tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post961240875088364606..comments2024-03-28T18:47:26.087-04:00Comments on GROGNARDIA: Kerfuffle de la SemaineJames Maliszewskihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00341941102398271464noreply@blogger.comBlogger85125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-1017100528326950572010-08-31T00:54:36.788-04:002010-08-31T00:54:36.788-04:00I think some thought did go into this painting. A...I think some thought did go into this painting. As someone else noted, the color choices are compatible with the previous cover. The elements of the painting also fit at least one of the criteria you've previously lauded in older covers, like Tramp's PH. The emphasis is on a dark, mysterious, subterranean environment and location. Not on the characters. There is a feel of mystery, of danger, and of the mortality of the PCs. It looks to me like they were going for old-school content, with a style that won't feel nostalgic or "old" to newer gamers. I agree with Astropia though, that they shouldn't mess it up with a border or logos obscuring and constricting it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-23856901756802379652010-08-28T12:42:51.040-04:002010-08-28T12:42:51.040-04:00"That's my point. I think many of the res..."<i>That's my point. I think many of the responses in defense of Matt and Bill were out of proportion to the presumed offense, especially when we have no evidence that they were in fact offended.</i>"<br /><br />Fair enough. <br /><br />In my own case, I certainly concede that I may have overreacted to the overreactions of others. Such exchanges can take on a dynamic of their own.<br /><br />I'll stop bothering you now. :)Akrasiahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08734103159691571156noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-32433371796584955172010-08-28T12:13:27.148-04:002010-08-28T12:13:27.148-04:00How they themselves felt privately about others...<i>How they themselves felt privately about others' behaviour is something neither of us have knowledge about.</i><br /><br>That's my point. I think many of the responses in defense of Matt and Bill were out of proportion to the presumed offense, especially when we have no evidence that they were in fact offended.James Maliszewskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00341941102398271464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-5898176836343106552010-08-28T12:07:43.851-04:002010-08-28T12:07:43.851-04:00"Interestingly, neither Matt nor Bill Webb se..."<i>Interestingly, neither Matt nor Bill Webb seemed to take these expressions of anxiety as unjustified or disrespectful, but instead used them as an opportunity to clarify the reasoning behind this move and tried to allay any fears they could. I'm reluctant to be more outraged at others' behavior toward a third party than the third party is of it themselves.</i>"<br /><br />Matt and Bill did indeed display considerable grace and restraint in publicly replying to others' harsh comments about their agreement.<br /><br />How they themselves felt privately about others' behaviour is something neither of us have knowledge about.Akrasiahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08734103159691571156noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-7898041154639021852010-08-28T10:59:58.698-04:002010-08-28T10:59:58.698-04:00The aesthetic must fit the style, or ideology, of ...<i>The aesthetic must fit the style, or ideology, of the game. I don't think this image accomplishes that.</i><br /><br>No, it doesn't, at least not in my mind. The Sardinha piece is too "generic" and definitely not quirky enough to suit <i>S&W</i>'s "imagine the hell out of it" ethos. If a more "modern" art style really is a non-negotiable -- and, if so, that's rather telling -- then I think it'd still be possible to come up with something better suited to the quirkiness of <i>S&W</i>.James Maliszewskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00341941102398271464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-70615091870420626892010-08-28T10:54:04.750-04:002010-08-28T10:54:04.750-04:00Being "in shock" is no excuse for leapin...<i>Being "in shock" is no excuse for leaping to unjustified and disrespectful conclusions.</i><br /><br>Interestingly, neither Matt nor Bill Webb seemed to take these expressions of anxiety as unjustified or disrespectful, but instead used them as an opportunity to clarify the reasoning behind this move and tried to allay any fears they could. I'm reluctant to be more outraged at others' behavior toward a third party than the third party is of it themselves.James Maliszewskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00341941102398271464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-60105982856752000942010-08-28T09:16:47.083-04:002010-08-28T09:16:47.083-04:00James, I think you are 100% correct on the cover a...James, I think you are 100% correct on the cover art. I think it's a fine piece, but it doesn't hold a candle to Mullen in terms of signifying the Old School.<br /><br />The aesthetic must fit the style, or ideology, of the game. I don't think this image accomplishes that.Kiltedyaksmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03462341093016199620noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-20995617611427348792010-08-28T01:37:19.437-04:002010-08-28T01:37:19.437-04:00The composition and lack of depth/contrast is rath...<i>The composition and lack of depth/contrast is rather weak and visually unappealing. </i><br /><br />Yeah, the lack of contrast with the GIANT GLOWING PILLAR OF LIGHT against the rest of the cave (where's the backlighting coming from? some big opening on the other side?) really bugs me. The placement of the light-thing in relation to the undercity-thing bugs me too; it looks like it's emerging from it? I don't know. The cover involves too much 'Wait, <i>what</i>...?'huthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16502682297320819595noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-65834042885049097482010-08-27T19:52:18.216-04:002010-08-27T19:52:18.216-04:00I stand corrected on the price, James, the $40 was...I stand corrected on the price, James, the $40 was the first price I cam across and I balked right there.<br /><br />The new cover doesn't appeal to me for two reasons:<br /><br />1) I much prefer the feel of the Mullen cover, it is in your face, in the action.<br />2) This isn't a strong piece of Sardinha's work, and he does do good work. The composition and lack of depth/contrast is rather weak and visually unappealing.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-36523973754672217272010-08-27T17:49:33.206-04:002010-08-27T17:49:33.206-04:00I don't like the damned if you do, damned if y...I don't like the damned if you do, damned if you don't thing going on with the cover. D&D isn't Call of Cthulhu. There's crazy, horrible shit beyond the threshold of the mythic underworld, but you decide exactly when and how to equip yourself before crossing it. This guy gets picked off by a monster because he hesitated at the gate with the skulls.Alexhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05078173255668986590noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-59818084205879197822010-08-27T16:58:20.243-04:002010-08-27T16:58:20.243-04:00I can't figure out what the new cover is suppo...I can't figure out what the new cover is supposed to be, which isn't a great start. The Mullen piece, whether you liked the style or not, was at least clear; this is a smudge of yellowy-greens.<br /><br />There's also not much in the way of, well, swords and wizardry, which seems a bit of a failing.thekelvingreenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01928260185408072124noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-28703572684020226362010-08-27T09:54:54.593-04:002010-08-27T09:54:54.593-04:00Blair: "Not only can you use S&W for the ...Blair: <i>"Not only can you use S&W for the Treasure Dungeon of Darth Viraxis, but you can also use it for a serious game of Tolkein-ish questing!" (does anyone else get a watcher at the gates of Moria vibe from it?)."</i><br /><br />Ah, at this point I would <i>so much</i> like to link to another, unpublished, Mullen cover... but it was not made public yet.<br /><br />I very much liked the Mullen covers (all of them), their function was almost that of a brand, across all products and publishers (Core, White Box, Knockspell, Ruins & Ronin, modules...). S&W will lose that.<br /><br />But I can also see the need for a mainstream look, and the new cover delivers that very well. <br />I don't see the d20 connection either. I, as well, was under the false impression that it was a Hodgson piece, linking it more to Dragon Warriors than anything else.<br /><br />The only fear I've got is that the new image will get <i>old</i> soon. That, after using the book for a year or so at your table, you don't want to look at the detailed, cluttered architecture.<br />That's a fate the old Mullen cover will never meet because of its highly iconic quality.<br /><br />What I <b>wouldn't like at all</b> (and where the d20 connection is right in your face) is S&W adopting the trade dress of the regular Necromancer/Frog God modules. That faux stone/swirly mist frame, those banners and ribbons and text boxes and too many logos - that was almost iconic of d20 fare. (Note: this is just about the outer appearance - the inside layout of Necromancer books was always top notch!)<br /><br />But the width-to-height ratio of the new cover suggests rather strongly that it is meant for insertion into the regular frame layout.<br /><i>If</i> that happens, the image will be ruined. The cavern is huge but at the same time it sets a limit to the space. The wall in the foreground adds another limit. That enormous Necromancer frame will squeeze all air out of the image, totally killing the vastness of the cavern. (An effect that can already be seen on the Slumbering Tsar cover.)<br /><br />That image needs to get the full bleed treatment.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-43154576639743322992010-08-27T09:00:55.027-04:002010-08-27T09:00:55.027-04:00"I think that shock was/is justified"
I..."<i>I think that shock was/is justified</i>"<br /><br />In general, I think that people should be respectful towards others, instead of immediately and petulantly leaping to the worst possible conclusions (especially with respect to someone like Matt Finch, who has done more than anyone else here in terms of actually promoting OS games). <br /><br />Being "in shock" is no excuse for leaping to unjustified and disrespectful conclusions.<br /><br />But, hey, perhaps that is just the idealist in me. :)Akrasiahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08734103159691571156noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-79296657920688534912010-08-27T08:26:07.317-04:002010-08-27T08:26:07.317-04:00I actually like the illustration. It's not li...I actually like the illustration. It's not like they commissioned some godawful thing with Liefeld-esque adventurers in uber-dynamic "look at me" action poses swinging 80-lb weapons. The muted colors work for me, and make sense for a subterranean city, whose residents probably don't go through a lot of house paint and cloth dye.<br /><br />The only issue I have is that it took me a moment to figure out that the monster in the foreground was holding an adventurer, and wasn't an Elasmosaurus wearing a snorkel and mask.Scotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00155926145150934199noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-42389892438657452362010-08-27T07:59:56.437-04:002010-08-27T07:59:56.437-04:00On the "worried about 'Old school' be...<i>On the "worried about 'Old school' becoming a marketing term" bit, I'd say that genie has long been out of the bottle, indeed since circa 2001. Pull that Hackmaster (4th edition) Player's Handbook off your shelf and turn it over to the back cover. What's the dominant copy there? "Old-school Gaming."</i><br /><br>I don't think anyone begrudges Kenzer's use of the term, because <i>HackMaster</i> does indeed represent something one can genuinely identify as "old school." The worry is about companies who can't make the same claim coming along and using the term.James Maliszewskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00341941102398271464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-32469166028326995492010-08-27T07:56:36.937-04:002010-08-27T07:56:36.937-04:00What would be so bad if suddenly lots and lots of ...<i>What would be so bad if suddenly lots and lots of gamers would play S&W (or LL or LoFPWFRP etc.)?</i><br /><br>I don't think it would be, but that's just me. That said, I don't think that outcome is likely with so small an initial print run. I'll bet a lot of self-publishing amateurs out there produce more than 300 copies for their products.James Maliszewskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00341941102398271464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-17248568652119609412010-08-27T07:54:33.586-04:002010-08-27T07:54:33.586-04:00What I found so upsetting about the (over)reaction...<i>What I found so upsetting about the (over)reaction to the minor piece of ad copy at FGG's website was the willingness -- indeed the enthusiasm -- of some people to assume the absolute worst about Matt Finch's judgement in making this deal. People were leaping to the most negative conclusions possible.</i><br /><br>I didn't see much "enthusiasm" for this in evidence on any of the blogs/forums I read; what I did see were people in shock of the fact that a company whose predecessor had publicly turned its nose up at the flagship retro-clone appearing without warning as the new publisher of <i>S&W</i>. I think that shock was/is justified, even if I don't think, as some initially did, that it portends something dire.James Maliszewskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00341941102398271464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-60201568700553550532010-08-27T07:50:27.106-04:002010-08-27T07:50:27.106-04:00One reason I guess I can't identify the cover ...<i>One reason I guess I can't identify the cover as "d20ish" is that I really can't think of the cover of a single d20 book. I never looked at them.</i><br /><br>Drop by their website sometime and take a look at the gallery of cover images there. You'll find that this new cover very much of a piece with the others shown there. Like I said, I don't think it's terrible by any means, but it's pretty uninspired compared to Mullen's original and does nothing to establish a unique look for this new game line.James Maliszewskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00341941102398271464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-23446802460213794582010-08-27T07:48:18.088-04:002010-08-27T07:48:18.088-04:00So drab and subdued.
It's a mite understated f...<i>So drab and subdued.</i><br /><br>It's a mite understated for my tastes too, especially when compared to Mullen's original.James Maliszewskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00341941102398271464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-1851078492485770102010-08-27T04:54:40.977-04:002010-08-27T04:54:40.977-04:00I've never really played S&W. I looked at ...I've never really played S&W. I looked at it and decided I preferred LL. So like some others, I can't say the new cover rubs me the wrong way. I actually think it looks nice, and I think it does evoke the sense of an "old-school" game, given D&D's inspirations (thinking Abraham Merritt here). And like JimLotFP, I can't really identify d20 stuff because I never looked at much of the stuff. I'd have a better chance of identifying Adam's cat.<br /><br />On the "worried about 'Old school' becoming a marketing term" bit, I'd say that genie has long been out of the bottle, indeed since circa 2001. Pull that Hackmaster (4th edition) Player's Handbook off your shelf and turn it over to the back cover. What's the dominant copy there? "Old-school Gaming."Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05465546887455130969noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-65792478191645831502010-08-27T04:21:02.691-04:002010-08-27T04:21:02.691-04:00I can understand the emotional involvment in a bel...I can understand the emotional involvment in a beloved game.<br />I can understand that there are different opinions on how S&W should be represented in layout and art.<br />But I really wonder at the rampant elitism that sneers at S&W (and with it the OSR) going mainstream.<br />What would be so bad if suddenly lots and lots of gamers would play S&W (or LL or LoFPWFRP etc.)?<br />Or is it that mainstream also means that a lot of people will play these games in ways that are not approved as Old School?KristianHhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00232005660954059260noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-34858476359321227632010-08-27T04:12:14.942-04:002010-08-27T04:12:14.942-04:00This comment has been removed by the author.KristianHhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00232005660954059260noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-91043823208771186822010-08-27T01:28:43.026-04:002010-08-27T01:28:43.026-04:00"I've noticed a rise in the number of com..."<i>I've noticed a rise in the number of commenters who palpably sneer at others' emotional connection to the hobby -- and yet seem to spend an inordinate amount of their time visiting every forum and blog they can find to tell people what fools they are to behave this way.</i>"<br /><br />Speaking only for myself, I have no problem with others' "emotional connection to the hobby." I have a strong emotional connection to the hobby myself, and S&W in particular (having written a number of articles for <i>Knockspell</i>). <br /><br />What I found so upsetting about the (over)reaction to the minor piece of ad copy at FGG's website was the willingness -- indeed the enthusiasm -- of some people to assume the <i>absolute worst</i> about Matt Finch's judgement in making this deal. People were leaping to the most negative conclusions possible. <br /><br />I've known Matt for 6 years now (albeit only online). He has never failed to be considerate and respectful in his relations with others. Moreover, he clearly has a passion for this hobby, one not in any way related to a simple desire to "make a buck."<br /><br />Consequently, the failure of so many people to extent to him any benefit of the doubt struck me as quite rude and childish. Especially those who should know better, given their association with S&W.Akrasiahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08734103159691571156noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-69447990241296578192010-08-27T01:24:53.484-04:002010-08-27T01:24:53.484-04:00They've seen how "old school" is slo...<i>They've seen how "old school" is slowly morphing into a nebulous bit of marketing speak designed to feed consumerism amongst nostalgia-besotted gamers (witness WotC's upcoming "Red Box" release of D&D IV) and they rightly, I think, worry that this move is another manifestation of that.</i><br /><br />This hits me on the nose. Again, to back this up, here are some choice examples of Frog God Games' blather:<br /><br />We've got "guilty pleasure" anti-intellectualism:<br /><br />"If you want to know the flavor of the elven tea, we are not your guys. If you want to slay dragons, rescue maidens and steal the treasure...well, we are."<br /><br />Angry mob chants to fan the flames of vacuous antagonism:<br /><br />"Down with MMOs! Down with video games! Down with miniature games thinly disguised as roleplaying games!"<br /><br />Passive-aggressive strawmen-snipping:<br /><br />"Our encounters won't be "balanced" to make sure no one dies, and a 3rd level monster may or may not have 50.2 gp (like its supposed to in certain rule books)."<br /><br />Now let's contrast this with the kind of thing that a hobbyist approach produces...oh, let's say Philotomy's OD&D Musings.<br /><br />If you were a new gamer, which would be more helpful to you in terms of developing a healthy and satisfying relationship with the hobby?Alexhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05078173255668986590noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-57105190364606799732010-08-27T01:22:00.367-04:002010-08-27T01:22:00.367-04:00One reason I guess I can't identify the cover ...One reason I guess I can't identify the cover as "d20ish" is that I really can't think of the cover of a single d20 book. I never looked at them.<br /><br />I don't think I could identify an old Necromancer cover out of a lineup. Well maybe the Wilderlands box cover, but that's it.JimLotFPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02992397707040836366noreply@blogger.com