Pros/Cons of an 'official' campaign world

[Starlord]

Re: Pros/Cons of an 'official' campaign world

 

Hey' date=' wake up. They updated what, 90% of the characters already (not having the product, I actually have no idea- but I see tons of old names in 5E CU posts) and sold them. It wouldn't have killed them to add a couple more.[/quote']

 

Well from your statements I can see that we are VERY far apart on how we each view this issue, but this particular statement seems go against your argument. If 90% of the characters (in actuality, probably not that much), then your main beef - not getting 5e updates of your 4e characters - seems to be mostly solved. Just don't use their history (you apparently wouldn't want an updated history anyway) for your campaign.

[Guzalot]

Re: Pros/Cons of an 'official' campaign world

 

Hey' date=' wake up. They updated what, 90% of the characters already (not having the product, I actually have no idea- but I see tons of old names in 5E CU posts) and sold them. It wouldn't have killed them to add a couple more.[/quote']

Actualy they added quite a few.

[Enforcer84]

Re: Pros/Cons of an 'official' campaign world

 

I guess. What is it you want? I'm just not seeing it.

[Hermit]

Re: Pros/Cons of an 'official' campaign world

 

What does the person who likes 5E rules but the 4E setting do? Lots of work converting assuming he cares about point values and following rules.

 

1. I wouldn't say it is "Lots" of work, some work, sure.

 

2. As I posted earlier, editions preceding 5th Edition setting did indeed have changes that you might consider meta chages (Sanctuary moving location being one of them IIRC). Heck, the 4th Edition Champions Universe gave updated versions of the Champions complete with what had happened in their lives. Deathstroke got a PR agent, name changes, and a new member.

 

and then there was Fuzion's attempt...

Which along with chucking HERO *Gah*, also brought up new setting material.

 

and THEN we had 5th...

 

Changes aren't new for Champions.

 

3. I think it is a bit unreasonable to ask a company to totally ignore producing setting material because others might have 15+ year old books still on their shelves that their new ideas might not jibe with. Especially since there is nothing to prevent people from continuing to use such. Economic realities aside for the company, there's also the fact that if I were Darren or Steve, I also would want to excericise my creative talents rather than simply reprinting someone else's decades old material.

Both economically, AND on an artistic level, I think new setting material had to be done.

 

4. And yes, 5th Ed CU setting is definitely a different and seperate world than 4th's, not merely an extension or metaplot. As Mitch pretty much said, it is much like the difference between Earth 2 and Earth 1.

 

 

Your mileage may, and seemingly does, vary.

 

EDIT: Apologies, you seem to want to drop the subject and I didn't read that post until I'd finished with this one.

[Starlord]

Re: Pros/Cons of an 'official' campaign world

 

People are so missing the point...

 

No change that. People are so *refusing* to get the point.

 

Time to stop trying.

 

The only important thing to keep from this is that I don't like the CU, how it's contructed, or how it was update. Let everything else just slide off your mind.

 

Honestly, from my standpoint at least, it seems that your 'point' has no logic to it. That's not an attack, just a huge difference of opinion apparently. 5e is a different universe. DOJ didn't 'give' us any other universes, other companies did. DOJ used 'some' old characters for familiarity and because it was easier and more feasible. Again, I can certainly understand buying CU and other sups and not enjoying them to any degree, but not what you seem to suggest.

[MitchellS]

Re: Pros/Cons of an 'official' campaign world

 

Hey' date=' wake up. They updated what, 90% of the characters already (not having the product, I actually have no idea- but I see tons of old names in 5E CU posts) and sold them. It wouldn't have killed them to add a couple more.[/quote']

I would say DOJ has only updated 30-40% of its 4E characters. There were a lot of "Enemies" books and adventures with characters in them. You are also completely forgetting that DOJ doesn't own many of the 1-4E characters. The full rights were never purchased. That's why you don't see Professor Muerte in the 5E continuity. He is mentioned but not written up.

 

My personal choice would have been to abandon the 4E CU entirely and give the players something new. Instead DOJ gave us a new CU which is about 50% old and 50% new. If people don't like it they don't need to buy it.

[Watchdog]

Re: Pros/Cons of an 'official' campaign world

 

You are also completely forgetting that DOJ doesn't own many of the 1-4E characters. The full rights were never purchased. That's why you don't see Professor Muerte in the 5E continuity. He is mentioned but not written up.

 

 

I just had a vision of Muerte as the Twisted Toyfair Theater version of Doctor Doom:

 

"What? Muerte suffered the indignity of being written out because they were too cheap to buy the rights? You just made the list, Long!"

[MitchellS]

Re: Pros/Cons of an 'official' campaign world

 

I just had a vision of Muerte as the Twisted Toyfair Theater version of Doctor Doom:

 

"What? Muerte suffered the indignity of being written out because they were too cheap to buy the rights? You just made the list, Long!"

The good Professor should be happy. He now gets appearances in the Flare comic [which probably has greater exposure than the CU].

[Enforcer84]

Re: Pros/Cons of an 'official' campaign world

 

I just had a vision of Muerte as the Twisted Toyfair Theater version of Doctor Doom:

 

"What? Muerte suffered the indignity of being written out because they were too cheap to buy the rights? You just made the list, Long!"

Steve Long wrote me out of a Universe once; ONCE!!!

[Ivan]

Re: Pros/Cons of an 'official' campaign world

 

Well I happen to agree with FOX.

I mean how dare they take already published characters away from the public like that. And they have been doing it for years. From the the original enemies books we are still missing Frisbee, Ultraviolet, Dart, Orb, and Diamond. This is a wholy indefensible move on the part of Steve and all the others at DOJ. We want the Geo-desics(sp) back!!!!

[Eosin]

Re: Pros/Cons of an 'official' campaign world

 

Campaign wolrlds without strong elements of motion are a waste of time for me. Meta-plotting and setting advancement provide something that I cannot provide in my home game - they make the rest of the world move. True it may suck to make up a character in 7th Sea only to discover that you serve Legion but that is one of the sweet joys of 7th Sea, there was crap happening that you just weren't aware of. 7th Sea and some of the WW stuff is just plain fun to read because there are mysteries to be solved and plots to evolve.

 

They ain't for everyone but I like 'em

 

PS - I would probably lean towards using the M&M setting because it does have strong plotting elements (I almost always run Fantasy). The CU seems bland because there is no meta-plotting or at least none from my POV.

[MitchellS]

Re: Pros/Cons of an 'official' campaign world

 

Campaign wolrlds without strong elements of motion are a waste of time for me. Meta-plotting and setting advancement provide something that I cannot provide in my home game - they make the rest of the world move. True it may suck to make up a character in 7th Sea only to discover that you serve Legion but that is one of the sweet joys of 7th Sea, there was crap happening that you just weren't aware of. 7th Sea and some of the WW stuff is just plain fun to read because there are mysteries to be solved and plots to evolve.

 

They ain't for everyone but I like 'em

 

PS - I would probably lean towards using the M&M setting because it does have strong plotting elements (I almost always run Fantasy). The CU seems bland because there is no meta-plotting or at least none from my POV.

I agree completely!

[rjcurrie]

Re: Pros/Cons of an 'official' campaign world

 

Well I happen to agree with FOX.

I mean how dare they take already published characters away from the public like that. And they have been doing it for years. From the the original enemies books we are still missing Frisbee, Ultraviolet, Dart, Orb, and Diamond. This is a wholy indefensible move on the part of Steve and all the others at DOJ. We want the Geo-desics(sp) back!!!!

 

Are you being serious? If you really want to use those characters -- take the hour or so it would take to update them to 5th edition and do it yourself. Frankly, I suspect you could use them as written up and no one would notice that you hadn't updated them unless your players expect you to provide them with full write-ups on all the villains you use so they know that you were being rules-compliant.

[Trebuchet]

Re: Pros/Cons of an 'official' campaign world

 

This whole issue of "official" vs "nonofficial" is moot. Even if you decide to use the official CU in every detail at campaign start, the first time the heroes capture, change, or kill a villain they've just altered the official game universe. Unless the GM is using a "Reset to zero" formula like many episodic TV shows, the best any official setting can provide is a common background up to campaign start. After that anything becomes unofficial anyway; and it will inevitably diverge further and further from official reality.

 

There's nothing wrong with using the shared history since it saves a great deal of repetition and mundane work, but players and GMs should recognize that the CU only provided a snapshot of how the universe was at a particular instant. Consider that instant to be the point where the timestream split into thousands of alternate realities as depicted by individual campaigns.

[caris]

Re: Pros/Cons of an 'official' campaign world

 

This whole issue of "official" vs "nonofficial" is moot. Even if you decide to use the official CU in every detail at campaign start, the first time the heroes capture, change, or kill a villain they've just altered the official game universe. Unless the GM is using a "Reset to zero" formula like many episodic TV shows, the best any official setting can provide is a common background up to campaign start. After that anything becomes unofficial anyway; and it will inevitably diverge further and further from official reality.

 

There's nothing wrong with using the shared history since it saves a great deal of repetition and mundane work, but players and GMs should recognize that the CU only provided a snapshot of how the universe was at a particular instant. Consider that instant to be the point where the timestream split into thousands of alternate realities as depicted by individual campaigns.

 

Treb, I think your missing the point of the other group (I don't agree with them). They want the entire "official" universe to be set at a specific moment in time and nothing done to move forward from that point or possibly conflict with what house games have done. To take as an example, the current 5e product line (if you can accept that it is a complete break from all other versions of the CU that used the same character names and concepts, which it is), The original CU book, CKC, and MC are all fine. They are establishing the baseline for the universe, and all came out close to each other intime. Books like U:DoF, V:CoS, Demon, etc are probably fine to all but the most extreme, because all they are doing is fleshing out already existing and acknowledged elements of the universe. (Of course, at this point there are some issues because at least some GMs will have already started fleshing out those elements for the game, and are likely in conflict with the the newly released cannon.) Finally, you have books like Sharper Than a Serpants Tooth, or Galactic Champions, which are not just filling in details, but adding in whole new elements, and shifting things forward in time, which means events that happen in individual campaigns are going to becoming more into conflict with the official universe. Pretty much what they want to be able to do effectively is tell players is "I'm using the Champions Universe, and this hand out covers what has happened in my world since Destroyer's return (using 5e as a stand alone example)."

 

Let us for example say I had bought V:CoS, and from the brief write up there and comments from other places in CU, CM, CKC, and USPD found Timothy Blank an interesting character (and I had no familiarity with any Champions Universe material prior to 5e). I decided to use him as the master mind scientist and nest leader. In my campaign, he got captured by the heroes without ever creating the Coil stuff. Now, out come Sharper, and I'm in conflict with cannon. Now effectively, they are having to say to players "I'm using the Champions Universe, these books are valid as written, these books have these changes to them, those books are completely useless, and here is the timeline that isn't covered by any of them."

 

While to an extent I understand and sympathize with their position (I've run World of Darkness and 7th Sea, where these conflcits could/did get annoying. I hate to imagine what happened to any Montaigne (sp?) court games after the Revelution Book came out.) I think that they are missing some important points. First as Hermit keeps trying to point out changes to cannon characters and set pieces have been happening all along. I'm pretty sure that Professor Muerte was a later add on to Dr. Destroyer's history, and not some thing in the good Doctor's original write up.

 

More importantly, they are going to fairly quickly loose all the advantages of working in an official universe anyways. This position puts a real and significant cap to the number of books that can be published for a setting, or creates the situation where the term "setting" isn't really applicable. Taken to the extreme, all the books for the setting must be produced and released at the same time or close to it (eg nothing more for the CU after CU, MC, and CKC in my earlier example). Because, there comes a point where you can't produce anything else for the setting without advancing the setting forward in time (creating the dreaded meta-plot). Unless, you have a situation like there was prior to the 4e version of the Champions Universe book. Back than (under 4e, I didn't come to Champions until 4e came out) you did not have a setting or a world being presented by the company. What you had were a whole bunch of disconnected bits and pieces some of which were put together for you like say mutants being hunted by Genocide, but the majority of it was not. I'm pretty sure because a lot of those elements were lifted whole out of the contributor's campaign with little to no effort to change it to fit some "official" setting. Now the owners back in 4e time, realized that they needed to change this and started making efforts to integrate things. They produced the 4e Champions Universe book, and asked writers to start tying things in more. (I knew Sean Fannon at the time he was writing High Tech Enemies, and Sean mentioned that he was asked to change the Weasel's origin so that Malachite was responsible for the cybernetics. IIRC, Master Control was the source in the original draft.)

 

Anyway you look at it, there is going to be a lot of work for a GM, because they are going to run out of useful cannon material for their campaign sooner or later.

[MitchellS]

Re: Pros/Cons of an 'official' campaign world

 

They are on record as not doing adventures. Waste of time according to them.

Just in case you forgot, DOJ has done 3 adventures over the last 3 years. The fact that people like you didn't buy them is what makes them a waste of time.

[Agent 13]

Re: Pros/Cons of an 'official' campaign world

 

Cannon = Large hollow thing that makes a big noise

 

Canon = Largely hollow thing that people make a big noise about

[Trebuchet]

Re: Pros/Cons of an 'official' campaign world

 

Treb' date=' I think your missing the point of the other group (I don't agree with them). They want the entire "official" universe to be set at a specific moment in time and nothing done to move forward from that point or possibly conflict with what house games have done.[/quote']I didn't miss their point; I just consider it pretty much meaningless. All elements of any official CU campaign will still require work on the part of the GM(s). It's futile to pretend otherwise. You made the same point I was making; you just used 600% more verbiage.

[Ivan]

Re: Pros/Cons of an 'official' campaign world

 

Are you being serious? If you really want to use those characters -- take the hour or so it would take to update them to 5th edition and do it yourself. Frankly' date=' I suspect you could use them as written up and no one would notice that you hadn't updated them unless your players expect you to provide them with full write-ups on all the villains you use so they know that you were being rules-compliant.[/quote']

 

Of course I was not serious. I should realize sarcasm(sp?) does not convey well over the internet. I just picked the worst characters i could think of to try and make a point. DOJ only has an obligation to produce quality work, not fill requests of "I want these characters and only these" I mean if I want an update of Shamrock than I will built it, not whine to Steve saying how unfair it is that they have not given us an update of him. "Oh, and while your at it I have this really kickin idea for a zombie ninja sorcer half orc/half demon, could you guys whip up an official write up for me?" (scarcasm again). I am an adult and I do not need anyone to hold my hand when it comes to building characters. Spelling maybe but not building.

[rjcurrie]

Re: Pros/Cons of an 'official' campaign world

 

Of course I was not serious. I should realize sarcasm(sp?) does not convey well over the internet. I just picked the worst characters i could think of to try and make a point. DOJ only has an obligation to produce quality work' date=' not fill requests of "I want these characters and only these" I mean if I want an update of Shamrock than I will built it, not whine to Steve saying how unfair it is that they have not given us an update of him. "Oh, and while your at it I have this really kickin idea for a zombie ninja sorcer half orc/half demon, could you guys whip up an official write up for me?" (scarcasm again). I am an adult and I do not need [b']anyone[/b] to hold my hand when it comes to building characters. Spelling maybe but not building.

 

Sorry for taking your post seriously, but given some of the opinions that I have seen being expressed seriously on these boards, it can sometimes be hard to tell. I did consider that you were posting in jest which is why I asked the question. The confusing line is the "I definitely agree with ...". It's a little too straight-laced for a sarcastic post. Or maybe I'm just easily confused.

[TheEmerged]

Re: Pros/Cons of an 'official' campaign world

 

I'd just like to chime in as someone running a campaign in a modified 5th Edition CU. I call the campaign NeoChampions because it's "Not Exactly the Champions Universe", if you will. The following is my opinion based on my experience -- no more, no less.

 

PRO: Suggestions, sometimes very good ones, about various interactions or characters to put in certain roles. The 5th Edition take on GRAB, for example, is a good case of putting the characters in the right "role" of greedy non-killers.

 

/soapbox on

CON: Glaring omissions that force me as GM to do a lot of work I shouldn't have to do. At the risk of repeating a pet peeve, not everybody's PCs are heroic. I've had to basically write up all but a small number of heroic super-powered groups for my campaign world -- and I had to rewrite several of the others anyway (see below).

/soapbox off

 

PRO: Artwork for the characters. Hey, some of us stink at this but are unsatisfied with the results from some of the tools out there.

 

CON: Having to accept someone else's campaign standards, or do enough rewriting you might as well have written from scratch anyway. I'm not badmouthing the standards themselves -- hey, if you want Missile Reflection to be the ultimate power in the campaign world be my guest and I'm not being sarcastic. I like my characters able to survive a couple of blows from campaign-average attacks, but fully understand my taste is not the only one.

 

PRO: Having a lot of the naming of background characters done for you. Saves me more time to tweak the writeups Seriously, this can be a big help for those inevitable investigation scenarios.

[casualplayer]

Re: Pros/Cons of an 'official' campaign world

 

Changing stuff, without asking first, makes me so angry. I can't tell you how mad I am that Fiacho doesn't look like Dilbert's boss anymore. I mean, now he looks like Locutius of the Borg! And don't even get me started on Le Sone/Ultrasonique.

 

An 'official' campaign world could be kinda fun if regular, frequent micro-updates occured, say weekly or bi-weekly. The latest issue of Millenium Weekly, so to speak. Even people jumping in later could just incorporate them chronologically, or dive right in and use past issues as backstory. The regular print frequency of campaign material just wouldn't fly.

 

However publishing GM-specific or restricted material extensively is a good way for a company to go broke. No one here wants that.

[MitchellS]

Re: Pros/Cons of an 'official' campaign world

 

Changing stuff, without asking first, makes me so angry. I can't tell you how mad I am that Fiacho doesn't look like Dilbert's boss anymore. I mean, now he looks like Locutius of the Borg! And don't even get me started on Le Sone/Ultrasonique.

 

An 'official' campaign world could be kinda fun if regular, frequent micro-updates occured, say weekly or bi-weekly. The latest issue of Millenium Weekly, so to speak. Even people jumping in later could just incorporate them chronologically, or dive right in and use past issues as backstory. The regular print frequency of campaign material just wouldn't fly.

 

However publishing GM-specific or restricted material extensively is a good way for a company to go broke. No one here wants that.

I think it would make for a very interesting monthly column in Digital Hero. A page or two of monthly CU "news" highlights would be fun to read and could take the place of the Hero Universe column, which has been gone for about a year now.

[caris]

Re: Pros/Cons of an 'official' campaign world

 

I didn't miss their point; I just consider it pretty much meaningless. All elements of any official CU campaign will still require work on the part of the GM(s). It's futile to pretend otherwise. You made the same point I was making; you just used 600% more verbiage.

 

Yeah, but all the verbage agreeing with you, wasn't for you. I knew we agreed. Only the first paragraph was for you. The rest was just to express myself.

[Trebuchet]

Re: Pros/Cons of an 'official' campaign world

 

Yeah' date=' but all the verbage agreeing with you, wasn't for you. I knew we agreed. Only the first paragraph was for you. The rest was just to express myself.[/quote']Well, if it's any consolation, you expressed our view far better than I did.