http://www.enworld.org/reviews/index.php?sub=yes&where=active&reviewer=heimdall&product=RPG
Originally posted by DennisKuester
likely because it is directed at a more general audience at enworld
That makes no sense to me.
yet I know that I wouldn´t write quite the same at scipio´s and in a serious review at enworld.
At a small site like scipio´s you can expect that most people who visit won´t be turned away from the setting just because I admit to disliking some of the new ideas offered in the latest accessory. They´re already "fans" (more or less) and I would tend to use a site like scipio´s to try and discuss all that comes to mind about the book - since there are lots of people who know the setting in and out, I´d be looking for differential feedback (which of course may change my mind about this or that detail)
When posting a review at enworld, I´d be aware of the fact that a greater proportion of readers can be expected to be brand new to the setting - people looking for something different - people judiciously spending their money on the best of the best. (and despite possible concerns about a specific detail of a specific accessory, I´d still be committed to the setting)
At enworld, I´d therefore be more concerned about promoting my favourite setting (than expressing each and every personal concern)
- yet I wonder why you feel puzzeled about it -
I can see why he would exclude them from the review as there is a big split on if the Magic Rating or Class Weaknesses are good or bad and knocking down the rating is just an insult to those who like said rules.
Originally posted by The_Jester
Well he does say that after time to digest he understands why certian things like Magic Rating exists and claims that it is a personal choice not to use them and gives examples why he personally doesn't like it.
...just not in the review, which would have been the place to discuss his personal opinion, would it not?
Originally posted by The_Jester
I can see why he would exclude them from the review as there is a big split on if the Magic Rating or Class Weaknesses are good or bad and knocking down the rating is just an insult to those who like said rules.
I understand your logic. It seems to imply a deep lack of understanding of what a review is, however.
Yeah, a review would have been a place to bring up personal views and uncertainties, but not the ones that could be construed as a flaw in the book.
If I didn't like a fundamental part of Ravenloft, say the size or the lack or orcs, I wouldn't cut up the Campaign setting or give it bad reviews just because it didn't meet my personal guidelines for what I would use or love.
If the complaint was a general flaw or large dislike I might draw attention to it, but even that might not warrant a full negative review.
Say I don't like Barovia. I find it too small or rural for my stories and too obviously Transylvanian so the Darklord is just blatantly obvious. And Strahd is too like the movie Dracula's without a mustache and long hair so he just looks dumb.
Now, would I then rip the Gazetteer I to shreds and give it a horrible review just cause a full quarter if it wasn't my personal taste?
No. Of course not. Yeah, I might mention it in the review, but if I was otherwise impressed or knew other people liked it I might not say anything to avoid getting comments on how much “Strahd ROCKS D00D!!!” or something.
I mean most movie critics don't universally pan comedies or action flicks just because they prefer French drama. Most don't even mention their personal tastes.
So Heimdall -for some reason- refrained himself from commenting on dubious rules he was unsure of personally. Rules that were previews and already much debated, so bringing all the points it into the review would just double its size. Strange, but hardly confusing or unintelligible.
Originally posted by The_Jester
Yeah, a review would have been a place to bring up personal views and uncertainties, but not the ones that could be construed as a flaw in the book.
*blink blink*
My previous comment stands.
Originally posted by Heimdall at scipio´s
Looking at the magic ratings addition, it too hamstrings spellcasters, arcane spellcasters more than divine. I doubt I will use it. However, the
magic ratings do have some flexibility as is demonstrated by the Dread Realms descriptions. A certain magic rating is over a realm, but exceptions are made for certain denizens or certain character classes (Kartakass and bards, for instance).
With that said, I look at Ravenloft as lethal enough without having to restrict PC abilities... so I'm sure this addition was really needed.
The Monster Hunter prestige class looks like a nice addition and at first glance it doesn't look over-powered.
Er, I'm not really sure, even.
I'm undecided on the class weaknesses because they seem a bit unbalanced. Case in point: Barbarian rages all the time... he's hit. Some
bards heal, others don't. So a bard is only hit if he's a secondary healer. Druids get hit near sinkholes. Sorcerers and wizards only when they
learn new spells (and the spells have to be one of three specific schools). Rogue when he kills with a sneak attack. The fighter, monk, and
ranger, if you choose the "easier" way, only when they level. Seems skewed against barbarians and druids mostly.
Originally posted by Heimdall at enworld
If you already have the core rulebook you may be wondering what has changed. That's what I'll focus on in this review.
Originally posted by John W. Mangrum
So, in short, you have no problem with someone saying on one forum that they have problems with some of the new material, to the point of saying they won't use it, but then, when writing an actual review in a more public forum, giving that same product a perfect score, making absolutely no mention of the problems he's raised elsewhere? You don't see anything inconsistent with that?
I see a lot of "uncertainty" and "I´m not really sure" in Heimdall´s comments at scipios + a sentence saying that he´ll focus on what has changed (and not each and every personal concern about details)- and NO mention of "won´t use it".
Also, If you want to discuss the "Perfect Score", I think that with the player´s handbook, there´s quite a difference between people who own RL3E AND the Player´s Handbook and people who don´t own the former. I think it´s legitimate to make an abstraction from your personal situation of usefullness of the book and what you think what scoring it would deserve for the group of people Heimdall mentions at the very end of his review.
Originally posted by Heimdall at enworld
There was not a tremendous change to the layout or look. If you're looking for a new setting, want to use the new rules, or your existing Core book is in pieces, this is worth the money.
John, I thought you wanted more people to send in reviews for ravenloft book instead of just write on message boards, Hiemdall did just that. Why are you being so negative about his review? I have lurked around the old Kargatane site, since the first net book, of late you seem so negative toward ravenloft. I remember reading your early posts before the whole official website, and you seemed less negative and happy then.
Originally posted by midnight-cat
Well. I can understand why Hiemdall didn't focus on the Negatives. The Ravenloft Player's handbook review was to attract new players.
No, that would be an advertisement. I'll add you to the list of people who plainly don't understand the concept of a review.
Originally posted by midnight-cat
John, I thought you wanted more people to send in reviews for ravenloft book instead of just write on message boards, Hiemdall did just that. Why are you being so negative about his review?
Because it strikes me as dishonest. When I wrote that you guys should write more reviews, I had a niggling concern that people might take that as a command to play up Ravenloft, but, and this is my fatal flaw when it comes to Ravenloft fandom, I gave you too much credit.
I was hoping to see intellectually honest reviews. Not distortions. Not free ads. Not spamming the forums.
If you don't understand the difference, then you're part of why the future of Ravenloft is going to look a lot like Champions of Darkness.
Originally posted by midnight-cat
I remember reading your early posts before the whole official website, and you seemed less negative and happy then.
Why am I negative? Seven years of taking fire for assuming you people have brains, that's why. Being exposed to fan-written articles containing naive anti-Semitism. Being exposed to fan-written articles containing endless naive sexism. Taking fire for, literally, not writing "at a sixth grade level." Taking fire for assuming readers would know what the "id" is. Taking fire for using big words, even when we immediately then gave the definition for that word. Taking fire for not shunning new fans. Taking fire -- endlessly -- for suggesting that DMs use their imaginations. Taking fire -- endlessly -- for telling you people the truth, rather than what you wanted to hear. Being accused of plagiarism. Being accused of being a "rampant" drug fiend. Mad Step Dad -- truly the most repugnant "fan" I've ever encountered -- spitting at my name even as I literally put myself in the hospital from stress and overwork over my concerns about protecting the quality of the Ravenloft line. Taking endless fire from people who consistently demonstrate that they're barely even reading the books. Ten complaints for every compliment for providing six years of free entertainment. The sad realization that, as other professionals I respect have advised me, I would be much better off if I just didn't give a damn about the books or about you.
Is that a good start? And that's just what I'm willing and able to talk about in public.
Originally posted by DennisKuester
I see [..] NO mention of "won´t use it".
From Scipio's boards:
"However, this is a rule that I won't implement in my campaign."
This took me about 10 seconds to find.
If you want Ravenloft products to be good and not bad, think about what makes a product good or bad. Then praise the stuff that's good while explaining why it's good, and criticize the stuff that's bad while explaining why it's bad.
In other words, "review."
If enough people "review," then others will read those reviews. They'll then buy the stuff that's good and avoid the stuff that's bad.
Then the stuff that's bad won't sell.
And the publisher will stop making things that resemble the stuff that's bad.
In publically praising a product you find to be of low quality or ill-considered content, you are doing the line a disservice, not a favor. And you send the publisher the implicit message that they can sell you any piece of crap they want if they stamp Ravenloft on the cover, and you'll publically thank them for it.
I know its a pittance, and may not seem like much, but:
John, I'm sorry.
I know I can't apologize for everybody--some may not want or deserve me putting words in their mouths, but for what it's worth, I think you're a good man, John. It takes a lot of balls to put up with the crap that you've had to, and it takes an equal amount of balls to say "I've had enough".
All I know is, I'm going to try to work a lot harder on thinking before opening my mouth or typing a message. If nothing else, you've made one fan change his tune. Thanks.
I know that I may have given you a hard time in the past or made jokes about your outlook on things, and I'm sorry. I know that I'll try harder to think about what I say from now on.
Originally posted by John W. Mangrum
From Scipio's boards:
"However, this is a rule that I won't implement in my campaign."
This took me about 10 seconds to find.
Looks like I've overlooked that - thanks for pointing it out.
Anyway, I see that your original statement at the beginning at this thread:
Originally posted by John W. Mangrum
I'm puzzled why Heimdall raises concerns about some elements of the book on Scipio's site yet doesn't mention them in the review.
turned into a rather personal debate and about how a review should or should not be done. You´ve made your opinion on the latter issue pretty clear. Still I would like to ask a few questions that are in no way intended as personal attacks.
1. I happen to own RL3E and the RLPHB and was considering to write a review about the RLPHB. Because I own RL3E, the use of the RLPHB to me is rahter limited - and because of specifics of my momentary campaign and the people I play with, there may be a few elements that I won´t use. Still I think that if I didn´t own RL3E (and I´d estimate about 90% or so of the readers of my review to be in that situation) the RLPHB would be a truly superb book, easily justifing a score of 5. What score should I attach to the top of the review?
2. Why did you post your original statement in this thread instead of posting it as a reply to heimdall´s review at enworld?
3. I did read your replies to this thread and now I agree in seeing some inconsistency between the comments at scipio´s and the review - possibly not to the extent that you do, but some. I don´t want to debate the extent of inconsistency because it would likely be difficult to reach agreement about that. It is my general impression, that some inconsistency between public and "private" statements are a very natural to human nature:
Originally posted by John W. Mangrum
And that's just what I'm willing and able to talk about in public.
That is not to say that I don´t agree about the point that "a review should be the place to raise individual concerns" - but (and please don´t quote this sentence without the "but") do you think that -even in a review- each and every personal doubt about details HAS to be raised? And: what level of detail should a review satisfy? I do like *very* detailed reviews but I don´t think anybody is obliged to conform to that level of detail in a review.
4. I do appreciate your professional work.
Originally posted by John W. Mangrum
Why am I negative? Seven years of taking fire for assuming you people have brains, that's why. Being exposed to fan-written articles containing naive anti-Semitism. Being exposed to fan-written articles containing endless naive sexism. Taking fire for, literally, not writing "at a sixth grade level." Taking fire for assuming readers would know what the "id" is. Taking fire for using big words, even when we immediately then gave the definition for that word. Taking fire for not shunning new fans. Taking fire -- endlessly -- for suggesting that DMs use their imaginations. Taking fire -- endlessly -- for telling you people the truth, rather than what you wanted to hear. Being accused of plagiarism. Being accused of being a "rampant" drug fiend. Mad Step Dad -- truly the most repugnant "fan" I've ever encountered -- spitting at my name even as I literally put myself in the hospital from stress and overwork over my concerns about protecting the quality of the Ravenloft line. Taking endless fire from people who consistently demonstrate that they're barely even reading the books. Ten complaints for every compliment for providing six years of free entertainment. The sad realization that, as other professionals I respect have advised me, I would be much better off if I just didn't give a damn about the books or about you.
Is that a good start? And that's just what I'm willing and able to talk about in public.
Wow.
I didn't realize you felt this strongly about this. I was saddened when the Kargatane shut down their site, but I understood. I was even more saddened when it seemed that the K was being totally left out of the loop in the new Ravenloft line, and especially the release of MotRD in 2004. I did not, however, realize that there was such bad blood in the business, and towards the fans. I do feel your pain, but I don't share your feeling about the Ravenloft fanbase. Overall, I think the ones I've met are a great bunch. However, I do know what you're talking about, there are some pretty bad examples out there, and I and do hope we will be able to rise above the "sixth-grade level." The USS is getting better each year, and I hope that by working together we can elevate the setting and the accesories being realesed for it to a new, and better, level.
I'm curious about the "naive anti-semittism." Is this something spesific, or were there a lot of them? Are you talking about an article, or the former messageboard? (In which case I agree. Some of the Off-topic discussions on the Goat sometimes forced me to leave the computer and take long, long walks. I was provoced...)
Other than that, I can only join the chorus in praising you for your effort and penmanship. I truly wish the Kargatane could be allowed more influence on the RL-line.
I've said this to Trebor in the past, and I said it a few times on the K's message boards. I honestly do not think people realise how much you and the rest of the Kargatane put into your work.
I don't have the book so I can't do it.
Originally posted by malken
I'm curious about the "naive anti-semittism." Is this something spesific, or were there a lot of them?
The anti-Semitism was limited to a few netbook submissions (which were not accepted, of course). And to be precise, by "naive" anti-Semitism, I mean that it seemed to exist simply because the author was clueless, not because the author actually possessed true hatred.
We had one (fairly prolific) author whom we eventually had to just outright tell to lay off the evil hooknosed moneylender stereotypes. His defense was that he was riffing on Fagan, and didn't seem to understand that not everything from 19th century literature was worth carting over. The most blatant example, however, was an article by a different author titled, quite simply, "Jews in Ravenloft." The article itself wasn't hateful or anything -- just deeply, deeply misguided.
The message board had its own problems with homophobia. This was, again, limited to just a few folks, the worst of whom decided that since I took offense at his claim to have slugged a guy in the face for making a pass at him, obviously I too must be gay. There was nothing "naive" about him, despite his defense that he couldn't be a homophobe, since he didn't believe homophobia existed. No, he was just a pure bigot, and it got him booted.
I bought castle Forlorn because of the reviews on the kargatane site. I already had a couple of awful ravenloft products by Lisa Smedman and never would have bought it if I had not seen those HONEST reviews. To think that instead I might have bought a stinker like the death trilogy because people were just trying to pump up the setting angers me to no end.
To think that a lot of people seem to have approved of Hiemdall's actions is even worse. If the setting needs to trick people into becoming fans, then you know the setting should just die.
A reviewer should give his honest opinion of the product, not the writers, not the setting, not the company, if somebody can't handle it don't bother posting the review.
As for the subsidiary sorry point raised in this thread, I always said what I believed and never regretted my postion except once when stu explained why cotn:demons was lacking the demon part. I'll admit (again) that I was wrong then but I stand by everything else.
As for the Mangrum complains and everybody responds with praise part, I would like to point out that he pointed mad step dad out (who I am no fan of), somebody who posts to this here board and called him repugnant, that would seem to be treading close to a flame to me. Mangrum is the best writer that I have seen write for ravenloft, but I don't think it is a coincidence that problems with posters seem to follow him around.
Originally posted by frandelgearslip
To think that a lot of people seem to have approved of Hiemdall's actions is even worse. If the setting needs to trick people into becoming fans, then you know the setting should just die.
I can understand that you do not want to be tricked into buying something or becoming a fan of something (though I don´t see how the latter should even be possible). But I think there´s a huge difference between fraud and omitting small details about opinions that may even have changed in subsequent discussion.
Also, if I say that i believe it is legitimate to direct what you write at the audience you´re talking/writing to - I´m not implying that I think it is ok to trick people into buying something you yourself believe is crap. I am quite sure that Heimdall overall really does think quite positively about the new RLPHB.
How an author focusses a review and what level of detail he/she chooses as well as what details he/she changes his mind about should be within the competence of the author. If people feel there´s something missing in a review or have a different opinion, the review itself (enworld) is the place to post your replies. It´s not quite like the backside cover of a paperback-novel where "positive only" comments are quoted (and even that isn´t illegal - quite to the contrary: It seems to be the "normal state" of this world)
Originally posted by John W. Mangrum
From Scipio's boards:
"However, this is a rule that I won't implement in my campaign."
This took me about 10 seconds to find.
I´ve reread a few things and would like to point out that this quote is not from the "good or bad?"- thread but from the "Realm Magic Rating"-Thread.
Also, I think it reads differently if quoted in full:
Originally posted by Heimdall at scipio´s
"Well, I've had time to digest and think about the effects of Magic Ratings and I can understand why they exist. I know they'll be of great use to some folks.
However, this is a rule that I won't implement in my campaign. I'm used to altering magic effects based on setting, anyway, so I have my own mechanics. Too many years of dealing with Faith ratings in Storyteller games as well as playing Wild Mages in FR, I guess.
To all who have read this thread so far: I wonder why I made the effort to continue replying to this thread again and again. This takes up way too much time that would better be spent at other things... guess I´m too touchy and too fond of my own opinions to let go - but I´ll try ;)
Originally posted by Charney
Or as I said previously you post your own review! It's not like only one person can review a book. As I also said, I won't buy the book so I can't make a review. I'll try to look at it in a bookstore but that's about it.
I don't own the book and after hearing some honest opinions of the book I sincerely doubt that I will come with 10 ft of any product that requires power checks for Tenser's floating disks. Also I rarely review products since I rarely by a product in the first days that it comes to market.
Originally posted by DennisKuester
I can understand that you do not want to be tricked into buying something or becoming a fan of something (though I don´t see how the latter should even be possible). But I think there´s a huge difference between fraud and omitting small details about opinions that may even have changed in subsequent discussion.
The point was that everybody seemed it was okay to leave out the bad parts or otherwise one is "hurting" ravenloft. Like we need to form a cheerleading section. Elsewhere people have said that fans have a duty to tout the setting, which is a load of...We have no such duties. I pay for ravenloft products thats where all requriements are met.
As for leaving out small details, thats a cop out why didn't he leave out the details in the post at scipio's. People's answers seem to be that people at scipio's already like ravenloft, so in otherwords its not okay to say a product is bad in public where non-ravenlofters might see it.
Originally posted by DennisKuester
How an author focusses a review and what level of detail he/she chooses as well as what details he/she changes his mind about should be within the competence of the author. If people feel there´s something missing in a review or have a different opinion, the review itself (enworld) is the place to post your replies. It´s not quite like the backside cover of a paperback-novel where "positive only" comments are quoted (and even that isn´t illegal - quite to the contrary: It seems to be the "normal state" of this world)
Its not in a reviewer's "competance" to choose to misrepresent a product or his views in order to pump up a setting he likes. As for the comments on the back of the paperback that is a severe misunderstanding of a little thing called marketing. The back of a paperback is not a review, its an advertisement.
*end transmission*
MSD
*See my comments below. -Paradox
You may feel that way, but we have a right not to sit back and listen to your flames.
Thank you for providing an example of _why_ so many have gotten frustrated with the 'fans'.
Matthew L. Martin
i guess you got what you deserved buddy.Come on now "j Dub" i think that there are some tissues in the top right draw of your computer desk.:sad:
good shiz my niz, MSD, Now You got the Juice:D
And you were an accomplice.
Now, I want to make it absolutely clear that whatever personal problems or flame wars that may or may not have gone on over there will NOT be tolerated over here.
If you don't like a paticular author's work, you don't have to buy it. It really is that simple. But it is my hope that authors and game designers will come here and post. Message boards are a good way for the community to be in touch with those that make the game.
But, that doesn't mean we're here to let anyone just rip in to said authors and designers. If you think you can do a better job, let's see where YOUR books are. Not published? Then I suspect it's a streak of serious jealousy and with the internet to hide behind, some feel they can lash out. I'm here to say that that sort of attitude won't make for a long community member.
In the old days, if there was something we didn't like, we'd change it and then present to as many people as we our version of things. "Well, that's certainly interesting, but I found this is how it works for our group..." was common.
There's no reason people can't adopt that attitude and be civil to each other. So play nice or not at all.
Mangrum: You're a good author. I enjoy reading what you have to write for Ravenloft.
MSD: You're a good DM. I enjoy reading the chronicles of your campaign.
But really, I (and, so I claim, most people here) don't care about your squabbles, and we don't (with the exception of certian lackeys) really want to watch you two fight in public. I'm pretty sure at least one of you is encouraging these disputes in front of all of us for attention, and you really need to stop. I'm not interested in fighting with either of you (as such would go against the main premise of this message), I simply wanted to say that this behaviour is not desired.
Oh, and if anybody objects to me speaking for you, I'm sorry. I say that I speak for us in general, and if I'm wrong I can accept that.
To quote a cliched statement:
This horse has been driven into the ground.
Time to move on people, and act like the adults we're supposed to be. You both should be ashamed of bringing this puerile conflict to this board.
andrew
Originally posted by stclax_26
Time to move on people, and act like the adults we're supposed to be. You both should be ashamed of bringing this puerile conflict to this board.
It might help to note that MSD believes that anyone who posts to support the Kargatane, or who has a problem with him, is actually a Kargatane sock puppet -- one of us posting under a different handle. This is an accusation he made on the SotK boards, then spread to here and, more recently, the Sword & Sorcery boards.
Here's an example, from these boards, from two months ago.
http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=90416&perpage=30&pagenumber=2
My sincerest apologies, stclax, for only letting MSD rag on us for a mere two solid months before commenting on it.
Originally posted by stclax_26
Here, Here!
To quote a cliched statement:
This horse has been driven into the ground.
Time to move on people, and act like the adults we're supposed to be. You both should be ashamed of bringing this puerile conflict to this board.
andrew
For real. Let the
ride.~B4Real
So just to sum up what I was going to say, Ravenloft lost it's quality at 3e. I had the 3eRL book...I burnt it.
But john just cause your an author (oooh) doesn't mean you can flame the fans.....
Well, welcome to the WOTC boards My name is Plunderer Of The Planes this
is my friend some know what is going to happen now you get to learn.....WHAM WHAM WHAM WHAM WHAM WHAM WHAM WHAM WHAM WHAM WHAM WHAM WHAM.... geez I guess if he can flame the fans and not get edited I can do that.....:D
Originally posted by John W. Mangrum
My sincerest apologies, stclax, for only letting MSD rag on us for a mere two solid months before commenting on it.
I understand what you mean, and I have seen the numerous comments made by MSD on both boards and am truly sorry MSD has picked you to somehow be his archnemesis. I had just hoped that you would have been the better man and not given it a second thought. Chalk it up to another d*bag fan of Ravenloft who didn't like you, sign off and go about life, knowing that he would never have anymore impact on it than some ignorant words on a messageboard.
Please don't read that as sarcasm. I have nothing but respect for you and your work.
andrew
Edit: There was more, but I'm already way off topic.
Originally posted by Plunderer_of_the_planes
So just to sum up what I was going to say, Ravenloft lost it's quality at 3e. I had the 3eRL book...I burnt it.
You should not let the RLCS3E stop you. The Gazeteers are incredible products and VR Guide to the Walking Dead is superb. WW may have a lot of editorial errors, but the content is better overall IMHO (of couse that doesn't includes Carnival)
["So why don't you write a review?" I hear some say. Well, it seems like whenever I try to plan out a good, formalized review I choke. Maybe I can write one and at least quit brooding about it in the night.]
Honestly, nothing was there I couldn't have adapted from my boxed set. I was Rather also disappointed in the history as so many of the "Iconics" that had been there couldn't even be meantioned. ( I know it's back to Obesessive copyright envy there but it does suck)
As far as cannon goes I quit using cannon at teh beginning of my 2e game. Did the same with FR. Cannon gets in the way of gameplay.
As to the Gazeteers...well this was a downfall of Prev eds and especially current ones...I really don't want all that seperate info that I have to buy. They should have gave us enough at the sourcebook to suffice.
Really though what gripes me is how John has gotten away with Blatetant attacks on the people who basicly keeps him in work. That right there just made RL not worth the Second look.
And of course 2nd didn't do that. You had to buy a book per domain.
I fail to see how the statements of one author makes RL not worthwhile. I also fail to see how those statements were attacks.
Originally posted by Plunderer_of_the_planes
As far as cannon goes I quit using cannon at teh beginning of my 2e game. Did the same with FR. Cannon gets in the way of gameplay.
As to the Gazeteers...well this was a downfall of Prev eds and especially current ones...I really don't want all that seperate info that I have to buy. They should have gave us enough at the sourcebook to suffice.
If you don't use CANON (note spelling) materials, then why complain about the new stuff or the authors that write it? It sounds very hypocritical to me, for someone to not use or look at new products, then turn around and criticise them and they authors behind them.
In terms of the Gazetteer material, you can't hope to delude yourself that all the info from the Gazes could have fit into one book. That book would have been massive, and cost most gamers a nice chunk of their life savings to buy.
Admittedly, it's a pain to have to buy new books every so often. However, no one's forcing you to buy them. They don't rely on each other for material.
Personally, I'm probably going to buy Gaz II and Gaz IV, and leave it at that. If I really want more info on the Renaissance domains or on Barovia, I'll go read some history or "Dracula" and work my own magic.
Back then I thought I would get a great swell of feedback from the fans to find out what they wanted to see most in a Ravenloft video game.
By reading old posts i was able to gage what some of the most popular modules, domains and darklords were but most of my posts asking specifc questions went unanswered.
The fustration built and built till I finally pleaded for ANY feedback.
The ones who responded were the authors of the gaming line we've used for 20 years! I was thrilled. Plus their support is what then brought on many of the great supporting development team we now use.
I can totally relate to Johns attitude. Especially over the debates we got into in the final weeks of the Kargatane boards.
I was disheartened at how one would be attacked if they had a different idea of what appears in the books. Of what they liked to do in their Ravenloft.
Everyone was very quick to spout a very specific view of "what Ravenloft is" even when the books themselves give 4 or 5 reasons or theories someone can choose from.
Like John I started to develop a lot of anexiety because from day one, for the Official Campaign My goal has been to work in the things that most fans might enjoy. I brought my DMs campaign to the development team and they embraced it. Its a great story, original, and very much the gist of what IS Ravenloft.
There are some major deviations from Canon however. And again my anexiety grew. I saw how venomous the community gets when things aren't exactly as stated in the books. I fretted that it would be panned, without it even getting a chance.
The DM and I have worked for weeks to come up with in-story reasons why certain canon event don't occur, and interestingly, our story in parts has become the catalist for why certain canon events DO occur. I'm sure this sounds all very confusing. And I believe much of it will end up being our background dynamics of WHY certain things happen, even if they are not apparent or do not come out in-game.
So the idea has grown. As things are revealed, as each chapter (called modules in Neverwinter nights) come out, we will also be releasing fan-fic materials. Stats on organizations and characters appearing in the game, supplements, etc. Perhaps once the whole story is told, we will even release the History and timelines we have developed. The materials only the development team has access to currently.
I've pursued the creation of all that additional material because I don't want fans (and the authors) to think we've just thrown out some of the canon or easily dismissed it. Some things just don't work for this story, as it developed originally out of the 2E Realm of Terror setting book and the two original mods.
We've added entire modules or major missions and story arcs to the story that deal specifically with canon because the events happen in the same time period or area as the canon. And again, I'd like to stress again we've thought long and hard how to work everything in, and if we couldn't work it in we've worked on the story as to WHY certain things don't occur, or occur differently.
Yet even with all this, in those final weeks of the Kargatane boards, I really felt like the community would be discusted. That the first time something happens in the game, not exactly in the books, someone will just turn off the game. My team told me I worry too much what the fans think. At last i had to settle on this, for my own peace of mind:
1. My team assures me, no matter what we do some people just will not like it.
2. The development team all come from different Ravenloft groups, and those "in the know" love the story, even those parts that deviate from canon. My consolation is I hope maybe some people will like some of the alternative ideas we've come up with.
3. The head programmer points out, that's why we have developed TOOLS and not just a module. With the tools anyone can develop a Ravenloft game, so if they don't like it they can always create their own.
Anyway... most probably don't care about this rambling mess. I DO have to say i can relate to John's fustration. But I also have to say its been John's (and a few others') support and feedback that has given me faith to plug along with this project. I've pretty much heard nothing but praise for the FoS fan-fic. I find it surprising most aren't stoked that they got EXTRA stuff from the authors, or the fact that the company LET'S them write fan-fic using their names and locations which might be construed as competition.
One of my favorite things are the Anchors of Faith. I loved how it weaved a nice back story to all these characters first mentioned in the Realm of Terror. It was so good, it eventually was worked into the 3E printed material. So we should encourage people to keep writing, not attack them at every oppurtunity. When anyone posts this stuff, fan-fic, a write up of their modules, etc. Even if we don't paticularly like it, the effort at least should be embraced.
These people are working on their own time to develop these works. I think if some kept a more open mind instead of saying (THATS NOT RAVENLOFT) more would be encouraged to submit material.
And thank you to the authors for caring so much. It's what has given us some great products.
~Andrew Bator
John is a great author and is no hack. I can't believe someone would accuse him of plagiarism. His net book articles like the above mentioned "Anchors of Faith" and many great npcs have helped me, when I need a brain storm. For many years I have watched the kargatane and rarely did I ever speak. I say now, Thank you, John w. Mangrum, Andrew Cermak, Andrew Wyatt, Ryan Naylor, and Stu ( even thought i don't think he has ever had his ideas printed) for all of your hard work. If it wasn't for you our beloved setting would be like Planescape or Dark Sun, and Spelljammers. I am sorry to see fandom to treat people this way.
Originally posted by midnight-cat
For many years I have watched the kargatane and rarely did I ever speak. I say now, Thank you, John w. Mangrum, Andrew Cermak, Andrew Wyatt, Ryan Naylor, and Stu ( even thought i don't think he has ever had his ideas printed) for all of your hard work. If it wasn't for you our beloved setting would be like Planescape or Dark Sun, and Spelljammers. I am sorry to see fandom to treat people this way.
Stuart Turner is the brains behind the Dementlieu section of Ravenloft Gazetteer Vol. 3.
I do note that I didn't appear in the list of Kargatane, which just goes to show that I should have spoken up a bit more over the years. If you're interested, I've worked on Van Richten's Arsenal, and Ravenloft Gazetteers 1 and 2.
Chris Nichols
tryst
Originally posted by tryst_91
i know i am off topic pretty much but i wanted to thank you for all of your suport and effort to the ravenloft community. What work did you do to the gaz1? just curious. (i just got it today)
Andrew Cermak and I wrote the chapters on Forlorn and Hazlan (along with John on the latter). In particular, I fleshed out Hazlik from his Secrets of the Dread Realms NPC entry, and wrote up Eleni of Toyalis based on material by Steve Miller. Everything's rather mixed together, but if you have questions as to who wrote what specificly, I (and the others, I'm sure) will try to answer as best we can. (I'd recommend asking in a different thread.)
I also contributed a great deal of general research - tracking down obscure references and plot hooks. For instance, I re-read Death of a Darklord and combed out all the NPCs, locales, and such that appeared there in, which John then synthesized into the Kartakass chapter.
Interesting, we found the writing process worked more smoothly if we stuck to a one-chapter, one-person method (as Andrew Wyatt did with Barovia and John Mangrum did with Kartakass). Forlorn and Hazlan represent the only jointly-written chapters in the Ravenloft Gazetteer series.
Chris Nichols
Thanks to you too Chris Nichols, I didn't mean to leave you out. I KNEW their was someone I was forgetting. Thier have been quite a few of you since the first net book. I want to say that I loved the Hazlan section in the first Gazetteer. I also loved kartakass, if may I ask John a question since he did the section, Where would he put the town Cortton from "Death of a Darklord" in the land of Kartakass ( north, east, south....). I will mention one other bit of priase to the authors of the first Gazetteers, In the Barovia section I truly felt the chill of the wind, when S was looking at the mountains and the bats were flying over them, that section was perfectly written. I currently have all the products you guys have written, and I hope you continue to wrtie for Ravenloft. If I missed another Authors's name blame it on crummy eye sight and small print.
sorry for the mistakes in the above post...with my bad eyes I often miss things.
Joe Bardales
Andrew Hackard.
If you check the first of the series, you'll actually see loads of articles by Joe on MotRD. As for Hackard, well, how can ayone that frequented the Malodorous Goat not know him ? :-)
Kidding... I'm afraid I don't remember many Hackard's works, but I'm not a good referencer anyway, plus, although I have all the BoS and do regularly scan and re-read parts of them for ideas for my campaign, I have never read them in full.
Nevertheless, although I'm at a loss here too, I miss fans reviews about the fans' netbooks (BoS, USS, etc) so that fans who have something to write might be encouraged to write more if the community likes their work.
For my part, writing something that would fit a netbook was more like an objective that I accomplished in 2001, so I don't feel now a great need to write (I have so many things to do that for most of them, I just wish to do them once, and then try all the others) but perhaps I and others could feel more motivated to contribute if people showed what kind of things they liked to read in the Netbooks.
So, how's about making a list of articles from the whole series of home-netbooks
(let's see, the BoS, the USS, the QtR, the non BoS Kargatane Netbooks, the MGNB, the GWP, anyother that I may be forgetting about) that people have been using, or that liked enough to contemplate using some day ?W.C.
But I will finish it.
All you got are grammatical errors?
Continue flaming, and I'll do it again, if no one else does.
Just give it a rest--we're back on the topic that matters: the game itself.
For the good of the board as a whole, just let it be.
When I was trying to get entries for the MGN2 (and to a lesser extent the MGN) I found it increasingly difficult and frustrating. Luckily (though rather a kick in the old ego) not many people where that concerned when I pulled the plug.
I can't remember who, but one of the K once said, "People are always crying out for more Ravenloft material and netbooks and when people say 'OK, write it yourselves' they don't, then complain when nothing comes out." or words to that effect.
Originally posted by Plunderer_of_the_planes
ok Honestly 3e Ravenloft was lacking. The only thing to me that was worth anything was the half Vistani and some of the gods info.
Honestly, nothing was there I couldn't have adapted from my boxed set. I was Rather also disappointed in the history as so many of the "Iconics" that had been there couldn't even be meantioned. ( I know it's back to Obesessive copyright envy there but it does suck)
As far as cannon goes I quit using cannon at teh beginning of my 2e game. Did the same with FR. Cannon gets in the way of gameplay.
As to the Gazeteers...well this was a downfall of Prev eds and especially current ones...I really don't want all that seperate info that I have to buy. They should have gave us enough at the sourcebook to suffice.
Really though what gripes me is how John has gotten away with Blatetant attacks on the people who basicly keeps him in work. That right there just made RL not worth the Second look.
I was pretty upset when Lord Soth was taken out of the RL series. The dwarf , Azrael, is pretty
corny! 
I too must agree that more material could have been placed in the main book. Can I at least get something for 30 bucks?
~B4Real
Originally posted by B4Real
I was pretty upset when Lord Soth was taken out of the RL series. The dwarf , Azrael, is pretty
I too must agree that more material could have been placed in the main book. Can I at least get something for 30 bucks?
~B4Real
Soth left Ravenloft before 3ed arrived. So even if the line continued in 2ed, he would have still been gone. Don't mix apples with oranges.
And the RL campaign setting is more complete than DoD or the two boxes. It's less rag tag. Besides it's meant to be player friendly (debatable of course) which meant the Darklords wouldn't be in there.
Originally posted by Charney
Soth left Ravenloft before 3ed arrived. So even if the line continued in 2ed, he would have still been gone. Don't mix apples with oranges.
And the RL campaign setting is more complete than DoD or the two boxes. It's less rag tag. Besides it's meant to be player friendly (debatable of course) which meant the Darklords wouldn't be in there.
*WoTC was responsible for certain changes in 2e(Also guilty of high priced books with little content.). WoTC took over the RL series in 2e(Now the product is a licensed WoTC product that is produced by Arthaus.).
*The 3e RL campaign setting book does not have more information in it than the 2e boxed set.
~B4Real
~B4Real
Originally posted by B4Real
*WoTC was responsible for certain changes in 2e(Also guilty of high priced books with little content.). WoTC took over the RL series in 2e(Now the product is a licensed WoTC product that is produced by Arthaus.).
*The 3e RL campaign setting book does not have more information in it than the 2e boxed set.
~B4Real
I never said it had more information. I said it was more complete.
Just look at how much domains are more detailed in the R3E. It's more fleshed out. The whole setting is more organized. Other boxes lacked anything about religion or tongues for instance. Some domain didn't have any info on the population. In the boxes, they didn't even give stats for all the darklords anyway.
The new R3E includes all pertinent info from the VRG which all the red boxe and DoD didn't do.
And let's not talk about the timeline...
Originally posted by Charney
I never said it had more information. I said it was more complete.
Just look at how much domains are more detailed in the R3E. It's more fleshed out. The whole setting is more organized. Other boxes lacked anything about religion or tongues for instance. Some domain didn't have any info on the population. In the boxes, they didn't even give stats for all the darklords anyway.
The new R3E includes all pertinent info from the VRG which all the red boxe and DoD didn't do.
And let's not talk about the timeline...
*Personally I could have done without the whole dozens of different tongues thing(In my opinion this only makes gaming harder since the pc's have to spend so many skill points on learning languages now.). I actually had to invent a Southern Core common and Northern Core common(Trade tongues that allow people from the two sections of the core to communicate on a basic level.) to keep the game fluid.
*The stats that were provided were sufficient enough to run a campaign that included them. And the map was much better as well.
*I do not see a big difference between the time lines except that I felt much more comfortable with the one in the boxed set.
~B4Real
Originally posted by Brandi
Of the new books, the Gazetteers are definitely worth it. I also very much like Van Richten's Arsenal, at least as an introduction to the next generation of NPC monster hunters, and VRG Walking Dead has the distinction of being a Ravenloft book that people in non-Ravenloft campaigns might find worth seeing.
["So why don't you write a review?" I hear some say. Well, it seems like whenever I try to plan out a good, formalized review I choke. Maybe I can write one and at least quit brooding about it in the night.]
I just bought one of the Gazettes. I will check it out as soon as it gets here.
~B4Real
Originally posted by B4Real
*Personally I could have done without the whole dozens of different tongues thing(In my opinion this only makes gaming harder since the pc's have to spend so many skill points on learning languages now.). I actually had to invent a Southern Core common and Northern Core common(Trade tongues that allow people from the two sections of the core to communicate on a basic level.) to keep the game fluid.
Fair enough if it works for you
*The stats that were provided were sufficient enough to run a campaign that included them. And the map was much better as well.
I agree about the map.
*I do not see a big difference between the time lines except that I felt much more comfortable with the one in the boxed set.
~B4Real
Well it contained LOTS of inconsistencies.
The new one corrected those which gave me a few headaches (like van Richten's age)
Originally posted by Charney
Fair enough if it works for you
I agree about the map.
Well it contained LOTS of inconsistencies.
The new one corrected those which gave me a few headaches (like van Richten's age)
Don't get me wrong I love the RL CS book(Especially the writing samples within.). But the boxed sets just seemed to have a bit more in them. I wish they would give us a large fold out map though.
~B4Real
Originally posted by Drinnik Shoehorn
When I was trying to get entries for the MGN2, I found it increasingly difficult and frustrating. Luckily (though rather a kick in the old ego) not many people where that concerned when I pulled the plug.
I was pretty disappointed, Drinnik. After getting on all of my players' cases to submit something to you, it came as a sad surprise that you weren't going through with the project.
Originally posted by Drinnik Shoehorn
I can't remember who, but one of the K once said, "People are always crying out for more Ravenloft material and netbooks and when people say 'OK, write it yourselves' they don't, then complain when nothing comes out." or words to that effect.
That is most certainly the truth...
Ok he accuses us of:
Why am I negative? Seven years of taking fire for assuming you people have brains, that's why.
and
Being exposed to fan-written articles containing naive anti-Semitism. Being exposed to fan-written articles containing endless naive sexism. Taking fire for, literally, not writing "at a sixth grade level."
I would be much better off if I just didn't give a damn about the books or about you.
and still....
The message board had its own problems with homophobia.
There was nothing "naive" about him, despite his defense that he couldn't be a homophobe, since he didn't believe homophobia existed. No, he was just a pure bigot, and it got him booted.
Lets start at the top..well best I can since John thinks I 1. have no Brains and 2. only read at a Sixth grade level.
The other quotes stand for themselves except some I thought to point out.
John you talk about sexism and Anti-semitism. But yet you throw out a HATE WORD like Homophobia. Yes a Hate word.
Homophobia suggests some uninformed yokle who just hates homosexuals. Not some one who has made an informed decision that Homosexuality is wrong.
I am one of those people and I find Homophobe just as offensive as derrogitory racial slurs etc...
If your gonna throw PCBS around ( sorry political correctness is even less grounded in reality than Ravenloft) remember MY beliefs must not be judged just as yours cannot be.
As to why one authors FLAME has changed my mind on RL well Back in the 3.$ wars prior to it's release one certain designers FLAME of the fans helped shape my decision not to buy much more 3e stuff from WOTC or to get it off Ebaywhere wotc doesn't get much revinue from it.
Now said designer did apologize and that did get me to coming back to WOTC.
So there Tell me now that wasn't flaming....:sad:
*Click*