Ken M's page

To soon to tell, seeing the new character sheets did not inspire me and it seems like the new game might just be a hodgepodge of other games ideas.

It’s funny how many get race in RPG so wrong, the characters Monty talks about are all token, designed only to not offend. That’s why token characters were created, to placate those who think there necessary and to mollify a few.

A color is not a race nor is it a celebration of cultural diversity. Breaking things down to color removes the wonderful diversity that each racial group brings to the world around us. To understand race is to understand the cultures that each race was part of these long thousands of years.

Colors, or defining physical appearance, spring up as each race was consigned to a certain portion of the globe. I’m not going to explain how this is so due to people having different ideas of the process but you must agree that these colors were common to specific areas of the globe. Now these colors become racial, creating diversity, cultural identity in the groups. Something the average American has forgotten.

Those Iconic characters. Can Monty explain where there from and why such a diverse group just happened to form as an adventuring party. My guess is no. It was not the goal to define these races in to cultural groups populating a fixed location on a fictional globe; it was to just pander to the idea that D&D has no racial bias.

A good fantasy world understands this. Having a white and black halfling in the 4.0 PHB only makes sense if both these racial types exist and can be explained. To me, just pick one color and be happy about it. Same with the fake medieval settings we get, pick a racial identity and stick with it. There is a reason minorities exist in any culture, many were not native and were either enslaved or are part of a smaller community established as say a trade mission or from a past invasion. Pandering to any group is dangerous. It really only works in the United States anyway, in Japan, as an example, the rules are different as there’s is an established culture thousands of years old versus our which is a lot younger for a select number of Americans, not the native ones of course, but there culture was both fractured and repressed for many years.

The images of the heroes should not be influenced by the racial, and sexual diversity of the United States but that of the world you’re designing. Be true to that idea, creating cross cultures within the limits of your imagination.

Ken

I understand, I’m looking to debunk this in some form due to Randies constant posting using members from the D&D community. He’s offering this on WIKI and other sites. I know the organization is dead, but, did it ever exist in the manner described by Randy. It’s his touchstone to fame, but I must have blinked when it happened because I never heard of it.

Not trying to stir the pot, just looking for some truth to topple his claims. Sorry if I opened an old wound.

Regards
Ken

Hello,

At WIKI there is a page created by Randy Richards.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randy_Richards

The question I have is in regards to this quote:
"World of Greyhawk Fan Club, which once claimed to be "the largest Greyhawk fan organization in the world." The organization claimed among its members such luminaries as Gary Gygax, Dave Arneson, Rob Kuntz, Frank Mentzer, Len Lakofka and Jim Ward. In 1998 Randy sponsored the "Celebrity Greyhawk Dinner" and "Greyhawk Celebrity Panel Seminar." "

Does anyone have any info on this event, organization. The people listed are pretty importent to the hobby at the time. Any information would help.

Regards,
Ken

Games like chess stand the test of time, as they are simple to play, hard to master. The chess market is in selling new boards, pieces, not in new rules.

BUT..

For any RPG that tries to simulate a heroic lifestyle is a matter of opinion of what is the best approach to capture the feel of the genre. It could be said that a perfect edition could be created then the corporate entities would simply continue to provide support in the form of adventures, miniatures and accessories to survive. Like chess the rules would stand on how to attack, cast a spell or craft a sword.

The problem is the business model supports the creation of books that modify and redefine the rules set. These books form the basis of the business at hand. Thus new versions of all games are required to maintain the business model over the years.

It would be interesting to say 4.0 is THE Definitive Version of D&D, defining the function of the game through its rule set then shift the focus to developing worlds and accessories. A rules counsel would then oversee the rules; by first authorizing errata in the early stages then making rule calls in the later stages of the game. So the system of how to attack, wound, move would be set in stone, much like the rules for chess, the focus would then shift from the rules to world development, tournament play, and so forth and the business model would shift to this configuration, supporting the core for years to come.

A dream I know

KM

Lets see now, 3.0, 3.5, and 4.0.

Every change to D&D has its nay Sayers, its doom predictors.

My plan is very simple. I’m going to jump in with both feet and give it an honest try. Once I have the book in hand ill determine its value to me. As I’m no marketing expert I cannot determine the effect the 4.0 release will have on the hobby as a whole, nor do I care. No one here was elected the guardian of D&D, face it, we all had a shot when TSR tanked and WOTC acquired it.

What I find interesting is the change in marketing that Hasbro has allowed, especially the info books produced by WOTC with no game material inside. D&D is in a whole new place now and it’s exciting to see it conform to merge with the online community as a whole.

At some level a trained, educated team of marketing professionals have already addressed all of the issues here and found that it’s worth the effort to make this change. More than any person on the net, these people have to be right in their determination to produce 4.0.
Time will tell if they were right.

KM

Umm, its just a reference, and a well written one at that. Shows we're more mainstream now. I fail to see the harm of it..I thought it had a nice word play.

KM