# D20 Modern Spectaculars Canceled



## PoppaGunch (May 16, 2006)

Just got a message from the distributor, and it seems that this book has been canceled.  Not sure if anyone was anticipating it (I was), but I figured I would let people know.


----------



## Kanegrundar (May 16, 2006)

Wow, this was posted an hour and a half ago and nothing.  

If this is true, the lack of reaction is a decent enough clue to me that WotC did the right thing...


----------



## Jim Hague (May 16, 2006)

I'm going to wait and see - this wouldn't be the first time a distributor's been either wrong or outright lied about books coming out.


----------



## HeapThaumaturgist (May 16, 2006)

Huh.  I was planning on picking this up, if only to look at it.

--fje


----------



## Kanegrundar (May 16, 2006)

Jim Hague said:
			
		

> I'm going to wait and see - this wouldn't be the first time a distributor's been either wrong or outright lied about books coming out.



 Very True.  I just expected this kind of announcement to garner more (any) response.  :shrug:


----------



## jezter6 (May 16, 2006)

I think that d20 Spectaculars was never very popular on the boards. Even the speculation threads over on the WotC boards were shut down due to M&M talk.

Supers has been done by another company, and done extremely well. It would suprise me to think they would cancel a product on that basis, but another part of me hopes they took notice to M&M and realized they were stepping into big footsteps.


----------



## Cheezehog (May 16, 2006)

didn't Hasbro recently aquire the rights to produce marvel products?  If so, maybe WotC is working on a Marvel RPG.


----------



## Kanegrundar (May 16, 2006)

jezter6 said:
			
		

> I think that d20 Spectaculars was never very popular on the boards. Even the speculation threads over on the WotC boards were shut down due to M&M talk.
> 
> Supers has been done by another company, and done extremely well. It would suprise me to think they would cancel a product on that basis, but another part of me hopes they took notice to M&M and realized they were stepping into big footsteps.



 Honestly, I didn't see Spectactulars and M&M directly competing.  After all, anyone that was looking for a supers game likely already uses M&M, Blood and Viligance, HERO, or some other supers game.  The only game I saw it directly competing against was Blood and Vigilance, since they both use the D20 Modern system.


----------



## Kanegrundar (May 16, 2006)

Cheezehog said:
			
		

> didn't Hasbro recently aquire the rights to produce marvel products?  If so, maybe WotC is working on a Marvel RPG.



 I haven't heard that, but I also haven't paid much attention to Hasbro beyond WotC's dealings.


----------



## arscott (May 16, 2006)

Kanegrundar said:
			
		

> Wow, this was posted an hour and a half ago and nothing.
> 
> If this is true, the lack of reaction is a decent enough clue to me that WotC did the right thing...



I was going to wait for confirmation before I started ranting.  Wizards has always struck me as on-top-of-things enough to not let a book get this far down the production line before axing it.

Wouldn't it be pretty much at the printers by this point?


----------



## drothgery (May 16, 2006)

arscott said:
			
		

> I was going to wait for confirmation before I started ranting.  Wizards has always struck me as on-top-of-things enough to not let a book get this far down the production line before axing it.
> 
> Wouldn't it be pretty much at the printers by this point?




With an Amazon release date of Jul 11 (it's still listed on Amazon, FWIW), I'd think that would be the case. Heck, I'd think that the only thing that would keep it from coming out at this point would be a court injunction preventing WotC from selling it; even if they'd decided that making the book was a bad move, at this point everything has been paid for so they might as well at least try to recoup their costs.


----------



## PoppaGunch (May 17, 2006)

Today was the first I had heard of it.  I received it from Alliance Games Distributors in their daily newsletter.  I hope it is simply a miscommunication.  I was actually looking forward to it.


----------



## Stormborn (May 17, 2006)

drothgery said:
			
		

> With an Amazon release date of Jul 11 (it's still listed on Amazon, FWIW), I'd think that would be the case. Heck, I'd think that the only thing that would keep it from coming out at this point would be a court injunction preventing WotC from selling it; even if they'd decided that making the book was a bad move, at this point everything has been paid for so they might as well at least try to recoup their costs.





Thats what I'm thinking.  Of course it could also have been rescheduled for any number of reasons.  Its still listed in the d20 M products on WotC's site, but I'm waiting for an official annoucement from Wizards.  I hope it comes out.  Even if you have no intent of playign supers, its essentially just another way to do FX and could work for a variant magic system or almost anythign.


----------



## Arashi Ravenblade (May 17, 2006)

Aw that sucks!


----------



## JPL (May 17, 2006)

This doesn't add up.  Maybe it's just being rescheduled?

I don't buy the "fear of M&M" explanation.  Spycraft didn't stop them from releasing d20 Modern.  Adventure! and Sidewinder didn't stop them from releasing d20 Past.      

I don't buy the "lack of interest" explanation.  Has WotC ever cancelled a project because a handful of Internet nerds diss it sight unseen?  

I don't buy the "Marvel rights" explanation --- why not use Spectaulars as a large-scale playtest? ---  although I supposed they could've drafted the license to preclude WotC from putting out a "competing" supers RPG.


----------



## The Lost Muse (May 17, 2006)

JPL said:
			
		

> I don't buy the "fear of M&M" explanation.  Spycraft didn't stop them from releasing d20 Modern.




Didn't d20 Modern come out before Spycraft?


----------



## HeapThaumaturgist (May 17, 2006)

I think Spycraft was first.  Spycraft was d20 and not long after the WP/VP system of SWd20.  VP/WP came out in that, got some good praise, and Spycraft used it under special deal with WotC before it got released as OGC in Unearthed Arcana.

--fje


----------



## Henry (May 17, 2006)

Spycraft was first released, by only a few months (both have a 2002 date, and Modern was released in I believe October or November).

It's a surprise to me; Forum poster Vigilance convinced me of the validity of such a product, because d20 Modern users would find more use in a seamless integration, unlike what M&M would give, and also M&M leaves lots of room for other genres, such as more "grim" versions of super-powers, because M&M, both with the Damage Save and with Hit Points, strikes me as pretty four-color with not a lot of room for "deadly grim." 

I know my favorite system would be M&M, but others could certainly get use out of an official WotC supers product. OTOH, the best thing possible for them would be to marry it to an existing license, such as Marvel, in order to increase the purchaser base.


----------



## King of Old School (May 17, 2006)

I very much doubt this has actually been cancelled -- if that were the case, I'd expect Wizards would have taken this page down already.

KoOS


----------



## mcrow (May 17, 2006)

My guess is if it did get the axe it is because they are holding off for the 4E retool.


----------



## Kanegrundar (May 17, 2006)

mcrow said:
			
		

> My guess is if it did get the axe it is because they are holding off for the 4E retool.



 I was wondering when 4E talk was going to be brought up in this...

That's even assuming that D20 Modern would be retooled along with D&D.


----------



## Vigilance (May 17, 2006)

JPL said:
			
		

> This doesn't add up.  Maybe it's just being rescheduled?
> 
> I don't buy the "fear of M&M" explanation.  Spycraft didn't stop them from releasing d20 Modern.  Adventure! and Sidewinder didn't stop them from releasing d20 Past.
> 
> ...




The idea that WOTC would be afraid of another product is a non-starter for me. The games would appeal to different tastes. There are people who have a pre-disposition that classes and levels and HP cannot work with supers. These folks would never buy a supers game containing these elements even if it was a co-design by Jeff Grubb and Steve Kenson, had a Chris Shy cover and interior artwork of never before released Jack Kirby pencils. 

On the other hand there's also a large segment of the gaming market that want something they can layer on top of d20 Modern, either to spice up an existing game with the occasional freak accident (like the guy on the X-Files who could shoot lightning from his hands) or to run a very high-powered campaign (think Aliens vs. Predator with d20F used for the bugs and Spectaculars used for the Predators). 

When I want to run straight-up supers, I use M&M in favor of Hero- a system that was my supers system of choice for 20 years. 

On the other hand, I don't RUN straight-up supers often, I run a SHIELD/GI-Joe style game were highly trained military people deal with mutants and freaks of nature on a regular basis. So something based on d20 Modern is more what I'm looking for. 

At any rate, since ability for products to compete is based as much on distribution access and company name recognition as it is product quality, and since Wizards has been "playing the hits" with their d20 Modern releases of late, releasing books like d20 Apocalypse, I would be surprised if this book was canceled and go out on a limb to say that if it was, it wasn't because WOTC is afraid of a little competition. 

Chuck


----------



## Pramas (May 17, 2006)

I talked to a distributor rep this morning and he said it was cancelled. If this is true, I'm sure WotC will confirm it soon. I doubt it had anything to do with Mutants & Masterminds. It's more likely that the last few Modern books underperformed and they just decided printing the book didn't make economic sense.

Update: The following appeared on game distributor Alliance's daily receiving report:
***FYI FOR THIS WEEK!***
Cancelled:

TSR 9569574 d20 Modern d20 Spectaculars

For what it's worth.


----------



## philreed (May 17, 2006)

Pramas said:
			
		

> It's more likely that the last few Modern books underperformed and they just decided printing the book didn't make economic sense.




That's exactly what I was thinking had happened. Someone probably went over the last few releases and decided that it wasn't worth throwing money away.


----------



## Vigilance (May 17, 2006)

philreed said:
			
		

> That's exactly what I was thinking had happened. Someone probably went over the last few releases and decided that it wasn't worth throwing money away.




The leadership at the top of Wizards has changed recently as well.

The folks in charge might have a new plan.

It's unfortunate but not totally unpexpected.


----------



## jaerdaph (May 17, 2006)

WotC's d20 Modern line has had a tendency lately to retread on what third party publishers have already put out for the game (and the third party publishers usually do a much better job with it too). That might work for an 800 lb. gorilla like D&D, but d20 Modern has a much, much smaller player base, so it's bound to affect sales.


----------



## Arashi Ravenblade (May 17, 2006)

Maybe they are not so much concelling the mechanics of the book so much as they are putting it into a new book. Think about it. They dont have a modern "Epic" book yet or a 21st level and up book, and while i would assume it wouldnt be too much different from D&D epic they might feel the mechanics of the spectaculars book might do better in a modern 21st level and higher book. and combining the two books might get more sales, one set form the people who would have never bought the supers book but would have bought the epic one and vice versa. So now the two groups buy one book and thus more sales, though it might have a higher cover price, though i would galdly pay up to 40 bucks for a supers/epic book.


----------



## Ranger REG (May 17, 2006)

Arashi Ravenblade said:
			
		

> Maybe they are not so much concelling the mechanics of the book so much as they are putting it into a new book. Think about it. They dont have a modern "Epic" book yet or a 21st level and up book,...



Do we really need an epic book for _d20 Modern_? Didn't realize we need to follow up on _Urban Arcana_ in a series of over-the-top game material.  :\


----------



## King of Old School (May 17, 2006)

Vigilance said:
			
		

> There are people who have a pre-disposition that classes and levels and HP cannot work with supers. These folks would never buy a supers game containing these elements even if it was a co-design by Jeff Grubb and Steve Kenson, had a Chris Shy cover and interior artwork of never before released Jack Kirby pencils.



I am one of those people you refer to, though I wouldn't use the word "predisposition"... it's more a familiarity with my own tastes.  But I did want to point out that I'd even buy *The Foundation: A World in Black and White* if it had previously unseen Jack Kirby pencils!

I have to wonder: if this book was cancelled due to the underperformance of the line, doesn't that pretty much sound the death knell for in-print d20M support from Wizards?

KoOS


----------



## JPL (May 17, 2006)

jaerdaph said:
			
		

> WotC's d20 Modern line has had a tendency lately to retread on what third party publishers have already put out for the game (and the third party publishers usually do a much better job with it too). That might work for an 800 lb. gorilla like D&D, but d20 Modern has a much, much smaller player base, so it's bound to affect sales.




Well, I guess opinions vary as to who does stuff better.  

I'm not sure what you have in mind as far as "retreads"...with a generic modern system, there are certain books that are sort of a given --- a sci-fi supplement, post-apocalypse, a book of weapons, some popular historical eras, etc.  Inevitably, if WotC doesn't get there quick, someone else will get there first.

Maybe the book got pulled because the whole line has been underperforming...that's plausable.  But based on Kenneth Hite's recent Out of the Box article about the extent to which WotC dominates the industry, I'm skeptical about 3rd party games stealing d20 Modern sales --- and I say that as both a fan and a designer of third party d20  products.


----------



## JPL (May 17, 2006)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> Do we really need an epic book for _d20 Modern_? Didn't realize we need to follow up on _Urban Arcana_ in a series of over-the-top game material.  :\




I wrote one for EN Publishing called INFINITE.  It ain't Monte Cook, but it ain't bad. 

Not sure if the market would be there for a WotC Epic Modern book.  

But a d20 Modern Hero's Guide would be a great idea --- all expanded character options.  And some epic-level rules could be a part of that.


----------



## Knight Otu (May 17, 2006)

arscott said:
			
		

> I was going to wait for confirmation before I started ranting.  Wizards has always struck me as on-top-of-things enough to not let a book get this far down the production line before axing it.
> 
> Wouldn't it be pretty much at the printers by this point?



Wizards posts the Off to Press news articles at the end of each month, for the books that come out two months from that. The last one was on 28.4, for the June releases.


----------



## bolen (May 17, 2006)

What percentange of a books cost is printing vs paying writers, and artists.  (maybe they did not have the art but I assume it was already written or can they just shaft the author and not pay him the full amount?  (I have no clue how this works)


----------



## Ymdar (May 17, 2006)

mcrow said:
			
		

> My guess is if it did get the axe it is because they are holding off for the 4E retool.




Maybe this is a grand scheme to end all schemes! Maybe WoTC is going down, and White Wolf is going to buy D&D, and the 4th edition will be called V&W: Vampire&Werewolf.

Maybe Hasbro wants to convict all roleplayers to play with My little pony for real this time. 

Maybe Bill Gates wants to use the OGL in his next OS. 


...maybe an apocalypse will come and sway the minds of all roleplayers to start watching TV instead of gaming.


----------



## Falkus (May 18, 2006)

> I talked to a distributor rep this morning and he said it was cancelled.




Why would a distributer have the information about this before the Wizards website?


----------



## Krolik (May 18, 2006)

Falkus said:
			
		

> Why would a distributer have the information about this before the Wizards website?



Because getting updated product information to the distributor is more important then waking up the minimum wage website updater and telling him to take the d20 Spectacular page down.


----------



## coyote6 (May 18, 2006)

That's too bad; I wanted to see what they did. Even though I've found myself unable to much enjoy d20 Modern for various reasons, I still was curious about d20 Spectaculars.

At the least, I might be able to steal bits for D&D. 

(Though $30 for a 160 page paperback is kind of steep. Still, I could've browsed.)

Too bad WotC doesn't do more PDFs (especially DRM-free, reasonably priced PDFs); they could probably make some of their money back that way.

OTOH, maybe they are going to use the mechanics in some other book.


----------



## Falkus (May 18, 2006)

We don't know its cancelled. All we have is some unsubstantiated claims that it has been cancelled. Hardly compelling evidence.


----------



## mcrow (May 18, 2006)

Ymdar said:
			
		

> Maybe this is a grand scheme to end all schemes! Maybe WoTC is going down, and White Wolf is going to buy D&D, and the 4th edition will be called V&W: Vampire&Werewolf.
> 
> Maybe Hasbro wants to convict all roleplayers to play with My little pony for real this time.
> 
> ...




Damn right! errrr.........  

well someone was going to bring up 4e in this thread so I figured I would get it out of the way.


----------



## arscott (May 18, 2006)

Falkus said:
			
		

> We don't know its cancelled. All we have is some unsubstantiated claims that it has been cancelled. Hardly compelling evidence.



We've heard from two seperate sources (one of whom is an industry muckety-muck) that Alliance says it's cancelled.  Alliance may be making a mistake, but we've moved beyond the realm of unconfirmed rumor.


----------



## bolen (May 18, 2006)

arscott said:
			
		

> We've heard from two seperate sources (one of whom is an industry muckety-muck) that Alliance says it's cancelled.  Alliance may be making a mistake, but we've moved beyond the realm of unconfirmed rumor.



That's right if you hear something twice from two different sources it must be true!!!! (J/K)


----------



## hobgoblin (May 18, 2006)

source critique i guess is a fitting word right now. i think that unless somone can point to something directly from WOTC, its are rumors so far...


----------



## malladin (May 18, 2006)

From what I know in my (admintedly limited) experience of distribution channels, if a distributor publishes details about a book, they've got those details from the publisher. 

There may be some miscommunication, or you might have the "false negative" sitaution occuring when the distributor has been told but it has slipped through their internal systems and they don't publish the information, but a flase positive I would have thought would be rare. I would only think that such things would occur if the distributor got misinformed by someone at Wizards, or if wizards themselve are deliberately putting out some misinformation about their products, neither of which I woudl say is likely. 

I would have thought that it would be very bad business practice for a distributor to deal in rumours. There's certainly no benefit I can see in them doing so. You have to remember that their customers are the stores, not the fans. If a distributor messes about with schedules and dodgy information, they're just going to annoy their customers, who want accurate and up to date information.

From what I've seen of the way information gets passed around, the Distributors are normally the first to know. I found out the release date of Upload: Etherpunk (our latest Etherscope release) through a distributor website before Joseph emailed as the author (although that's a kind-of, as I did know roughly when to expect it before hand, but it does illustrate my point, I think).

I think in our day and age there's so many conspiracy theories that people are losing their ability to critically analyse all situations and just putting everything down to rumour, even when a source is equally reliable as any "official" announcement.

Ben


----------



## Yuan-Ti (May 18, 2006)

malladin said:
			
		

> I think in our day and age there's so many conspiracy theories that people are losing their ability to critically analyse all situations and just putting everything down to rumour, even when a source is equally reliable as any "official" announcement.
> Ben




Nicely said.


----------



## Bretbo (May 18, 2006)

Cancelled?  KKKHHHAAANNN!!!


----------



## hobgoblin (May 18, 2006)

right now for me its more a case that people seems to have info from two diffrent sources, but those again have it from the same source. now if it was two diffrent sources on that layer as well, i would concider it likely to be truth. but as its just one source, and not wotc, things become a bit foggy...


----------



## Morgenstern (May 19, 2006)

Timmundo said:
			
		

> Didn't d20 Modern come out before Spycraft?




WotC announced d20 Modern at the same GAMA we were putting Spycraft books in people's hands - about 3 months after we gave courtesy copies to WotC and about 8 months before Modern hit the shelves.

I am certainly curious about Spectaculars though. I was wondering what their take on super-y-ness might look like.


----------



## jaerdaph (May 19, 2006)

JPL said:
			
		

> Well, I guess opinions vary as to who does stuff better.
> 
> I'm not sure what you have in mind as far as "retreads"...with a generic modern system, there are certain books that are sort of a given --- a sci-fi supplement, post-apocalypse, a book of weapons, some popular historical eras, etc.  Inevitably, if WotC doesn't get there quick, someone else will get there first.
> 
> Maybe the book got pulled because the whole line has been underperforming...that's plausable.  But based on Kenneth Hite's recent Out of the Box article about the extent to which WotC dominates the industry, I'm skeptical about 3rd party games stealing d20 Modern sales --- and I say that as both a fan and a designer of third party d20  products.




True, it all comes down to personal opinion and preference. I think companies like Adamant and RPGObjects, to name just a two, have done a better job with similar subject matter, either before WotC got around to it after. Thrilling Tales and Sidewinder Recoiled come to mind as prime examples of such products for me. I'm not really in to post-apoc, but Darwin's World comes to mind as well. YMMV. 

But d20 Modern doesn't have the brand name strength or longevity that D&D has. So when everyone and their brother puts out a fantasy RPG ships and the seas supplement, those all but get pushed to the side, no matter how good they are, when WotC puts out Stormwrack (or whatever it was called) for "official" D&D. I don't think that happens as much with d20 Modern. 

What I'm not saying is that the WotC d20 Modern products are bad, but some are stronger than others, and there are parts that I like in each. The weaker ones tend to do too much in too little space (d20 Past, d20 Future Tech). The stronger ones concentrate on one subject (d20 Apocolypse. Sadly we'll never know about Spectaculars). I would rather have seen d20 Pulp, d20 Victorian Horror, d20 Spaceships and for those who are fans of the genre, d20 Mecha, rather than d20 Past and d20 Future Tech. 

I am excited by the possibility of a d20 Modern Dark*Matter. If that is successful for them, I hope they follow up with d20 Star*Drive, d20 Top Secret, and more. 

If anything, WotC isn't giving up on d20 Modern, but looking at a new direction to increase interest and ultimately sales. And that can only be a good thing. 

Edit: And at the end of the day, I don't even need d20 Spectaculars to use d20 Modern for supers. I already have Blood and Vigilance and Four Color to Fantasy Revised.


----------



## HeapThaumaturgist (May 19, 2006)

While I don't NEED Spectaculars, I'd have really liked to see what WotC did with it.

Hopefully we still will and this is just an unfortunate miscommunication of some sort. 

--fje


----------



## TheAuldGrump (May 19, 2006)

Or they may have cancelled the title, but not the product. Perhaps the new name might be Maelstrom... 

*EDIT* The last D20 Modern supplement I bought was D20 Past, and it so disappointed me that I have not looked at another D20 Modern book since.

The Auld Grump


----------



## coyote6 (May 19, 2006)

TheAuldGrump said:
			
		

> *EDIT* The last D20 Modern supplement I bought was D20 Past, and it so disappointed me that I have not looked at another D20 Modern book since.




I flipped through Critical Locations at the FLGS, and it looked good. Nice maps, and I don't think they're available free on the website. I'll probably pick it up sooner or later.

d20 Apocalypse made me want to run a post-apocalypse game. And I found the art in d20 Future & the tech supplement that came out recently (the name of which I forget) quite inspiring.

Of course, what they inspired was a desire to play GURPS 4e, or maybe try some version of M&M 2e & True20 -- but not d20 Modern. And with Critical Locations, I was thinking, "Hmm, looks useful for Shadowrun."


----------



## hobgoblin (May 19, 2006)

heh, maybe ill grab that critical locations then


----------



## JPL (May 19, 2006)

I think we should hold off on concluding that d20 Spectaculars has been permanently shelved (although I understand that the book is said to have been "cancelled" rather than "rescheduled").  

As others have pointed out, a book this close to publication date must be mostly complete, so there's already a substantial investment.  

Also, supers is popular enough as a gaming genre that it makes sense that WotC would want to have some sort of d20 supers game out there.

I'm actually not sure that d20 Modern would be the way to go if you really wanted to model something like the Marvel Universe, where Norse gods and guys who can talk to ants are on the same team and are all "starting characters".  But the idea in d20 Spectaculars that characters follow the old-fashioned D&D power curve --- start with magic missle once per day and work your way up to fireball and then up to wish --- is perfectly gameable.


----------



## Kenson (May 19, 2006)

JPL said:
			
		

> I'm actually not sure that d20 Modern would be the way to go if you really wanted to model something like the Marvel Universe, where Norse gods and guys who can talk to ants are on the same team and are all "starting characters".



As you note, there's big difference between "can model Thor" and "can model Thor (Superman, etc.) as a starting character on an equal footing with other starting characters". Most superhero RPGs can do the former; few, if any, can do the latter.

I, too, am curious how Mearls and Stephens (both skilled d20 designers) tackled some mechanical issues in _Spectaculars._ Time will tell whether I get to find out for the price of a book or the price of a drink at a convention bar.


----------



## PoppaGunch (May 19, 2006)

I went out to Alliance's website and checked their stock.  They no longer even list the book,  My pre-order has been removed, and my sales associate tells me it isn't happening.  While that might not be enough for you guys, it certainly is plenty for me.

I would love to know the reason why though.

When I worked for WotC (retail, don't get all in a bunch), we were constantly hearing from on high how Hasborg was going to shut down various lines because of their performance.  Then we were notified that we would be shut down because of our performance.  I wouldn't be surprised if the elder gods didn't tell WotC to stop producing things that don't perform.

Anywho, I simply thought it would be nice to let people know.  I know most need a letter from WotC signed in triplicate and done on Cthulhu's personal memo pad.  That fine too.  I will say I have never pumped false information into these boards, and would be the first to apologize if I saw evidence that I had posted in error.


----------



## SWBaxter (May 19, 2006)

PoppaGunch said:
			
		

> Anywho, I simply thought it would be nice to let people know.  I know most need a letter from WotC signed in triplicate and done on Cthulhu's personal memo pad.




Nope. But some statement on their website other than "this product will be released in July 2006" would have a bit more weight with me. Not doubting it's cancelled or delayed or whatever, just saying it seems prudent to give the publisher the final word.


----------



## Morgenstern (May 19, 2006)

I don't expect an anouncement from WotC on the topic for some time, and I think it's somewhat ignorant to expect that they would be quick to release such an announcement - doing so would be stupid on their part. Canceling a book stinks of "dead game" and would damage the sales of the entire line, even if it's only a single book they are backing away from. That impacts both their numbers leaving the warehouse and leaves stores with product on the shelves that "everybody knows" is for a dead game, perhaps damaging their relationship with those stores that are stuck holding the bag. They weren't terribly forthcomming about the Star Wars RPG - why would you expect them to be in this case?

This doesn't prove things one way or the other, but I think it may be a more useful framework for evaluating the significance of WotC's silence.


----------



## Morgenstern (May 19, 2006)

Further, let's consider the reverse case: This rumor IS damaging their sales. If it is untrue I would hope/expect that they would take some action to defuse it before it does any more harm to them (assuming they are even aware of it).

Such announcements (both confirming or denying) are _business decisions_, not news updates for our convienience .


----------



## jaerdaph (May 19, 2006)

Hey Poppa,

Let's just say I'm more than convinced it's a done deal, but as always, WotC needs to make some sort of announcement. 

Same deal with the existence of d20 Modern Dark*Matter, where we have even less evidence for short of an amazon.com database placeholder.  

Thanks for the info, though.


----------



## SWBaxter (May 19, 2006)

Morgenstern said:
			
		

> They weren't terribly forthcomming about the Star Wars RPG - why would you expect them to be in this case?




Well, the rather obvious difference is that Star Wars had nothing scheduled for a very long time. d20 Spectaculars is an actual scheduled product, due for release relatively soon. In the past, when previously announced products have been delayed/dropped/whatever, WOTC has updated the release info on their website to reflect that. So... perhaps I'm naive, but it seems logical to conclude that WOTC will clarify the product's status, probably relatively soon (in real world time, not internet time). Add to that the fact that I can't see what advantage I derive from learning of the product's cancellation (or whatever) now vs. up to a month from now, and I guess I just don't see any reason to rush to judgement. It would of course be different for somebody who owned a game store and/or planned to build a huge sales campaign around d20 Spectaculars, but for me at least that's not the case.


----------



## gladiator (May 20, 2006)

> As others have pointed out, a book this close to publication date must be mostly complete, so there's already a substantial investment.




It's possible that the book was cancelled some time ago, but the distributors weren't notified until recently.

If WotC believes that a cancelled book announcement could hurt sales of their entire d20 product line then it would make sense for them to delay the announcement for as long as possible.


----------



## JPL (May 20, 2006)

gladiator said:
			
		

> If WotC believes that a cancelled book announcement could hurt sales of their entire d20 product line then it would make sense for them to delay the announcement for as long as possible.





I don't know why they would think that simply taking a book off the schedule with an explanation that it was being retooled or rethought or rescheduled or whatever would hurt sales of the entire line in any significant fashion.

And wouldn't pulling a book off the schedule months ahead of time and providing a reasonable explanation attract a lot less negative attention and speculation than doing it this way?  I mean, now we have folks speculating that this means the death of entire line.


----------



## Eternal Knot Games (May 20, 2006)

Then again letting the rumours fly allow for more people to hear about the product.  People like me...

I did not even guess that WotC was thinking about a supers game and now I do.  BTW I got both M&M (1&2) and Blood 'n' Vigilance so I'll not be getting it but there might be others out there that would pick it up because WotC done it and so must be good.


----------



## Qualidar (May 20, 2006)

JPL said:
			
		

> And wouldn't pulling a book off the schedule months ahead of time and providing a reasonable explanation attract a lot less negative attention and speculation than doing it this way?  I mean, now we have folks speculating that this means the death of entire line.



The death of the entire line explains what we're seeing, so naturally people are speculating that it could be what's driving this.

~Qualidar~


----------



## JPL (May 20, 2006)

Qualidar said:
			
		

> The death of the entire line explains what we're seeing, so naturally people are speculating that it could be what's driving this.
> 
> ~Qualidar~




Except "what we're seeing" apparently also includes d20 Dark*Matter on the schedule, which doesn't sound like a dead line to me.

And Eternal Knot, I don't see how "getting people talking" about a product WotC is NOT publishing puts any money in WotC's pockets.  Building buzz = good; building buzz about vaporware = bad; building buzz suggesting the whole line is kaput = very bad.


----------



## M.L. Martin (May 20, 2006)

I think part of the skepticism is that many distributors in this industry are notorious for errors and misinformation, so people are dubious about anything they state that's not confirmed by a company.

      Matthew L. Martin


----------



## Morgenstern (May 20, 2006)

SWBaxter said:
			
		

> Well, the rather obvious difference is that Star Wars had nothing scheduled for a very long time. d20 Spectaculars is an actual scheduled product, due for release relatively soon. In the past, when previously announced products have been delayed/dropped/whatever, WOTC has updated the release info on their website to reflect that.




Fair enough. I'm just saying we should be examining their silence in light of past behavior. If they've been good about promptly announcing cancellations in the past, then this is odd. But 2 different distributors closing out their pre-orders sounds a lot like conducting business rather than saving face.



> So... perhaps I'm naive, but it seems logical to conclude that WOTC will clarify the product's status, probably relatively soon (in real world time, not internet time).




Agreed on all counts. Both that they will be compelled to say somehing fairly soon if the book doesn't hit shelves, and that any such action will take place in real world time - which is often the last possible second when you have to give out bad news .



> Add to that the fact that I can't see what advantage I derive from learning of the product's cancellation (or whatever) now vs. up to a month from now, and I guess I just don't see any reason to rush to judgement.




Again, I think you're looking at it backwards. Anouncements aren't about the advantage they give customers, they are about the advantage they give the company - and it seems clear that in general, making a damaging announcement about a line that may be on shakey ground is something you don't rush into unless you have a very personal relationship with your customers. IF (note the qualifing value of this word) distributors are hearing about it now, the decision was probably made some time ago. Probably a public statement was planned for around the same time and they didn't expect the word to get out so quickly. Or maybe we've just got bad intel and nothing's up with this book .


----------



## Morgenstern (May 20, 2006)

JPL said:
			
		

> I don't know why they would think that simply taking a book off the schedule with an explanation that it was being retooled or rethought or rescheduled or whatever would hurt sales of the entire line in any significant fashion.




Sure, if you are retooling, rethinking, or rescheduling. If you are just canceling, then no, months in advance is a pretty bad play. And _saying_ you're re-doing a book in some fashion when you never intend to come through is even worse.



> And wouldn't pulling a book off the schedule months ahead of time and providing a reasonable explanation attract a lot less negative attention and speculation than doing it this way?  I mean, now we have folks speculating that this means the death of entire line.




Depends on your explination, I would think. If 5 months ago they anounced "We don't think Spectaculars will be a money maker. We're canceling it." They would only have earned themselves 5 more month of "Is d20 Mordern on it's way out?" sepculation that would have almost certainly hurt the sales of existing products and probably put a crimp in Critical Locations because a certain number of fans would have wandered off in the mean time. I can definitely envision holding this statement as long as possible to give Critical Locations a fair chance during its most critical sales period.

Seriously, what advantage does it net them? I realize it's inconvienient to us to find these things out at the last second, but that's not the motivation.


----------



## arscott (May 20, 2006)

JPL said:
			
		

> Except "what we're seeing" apparently also includes d20 Dark*Matter on the schedule, which doesn't sound like a dead line to me.
> 
> And Eternal Knot, I don't see how "getting people talking" about a product WotC is NOT publishing puts any money in WotC's pockets.  Building buzz = good; building buzz about vaporware = bad; building buzz suggesting the whole line is kaput = very bad.



No, In fact, we're seeing Dark•Matter mysteriously _not_ on the schedule.  There's an entry for three dragon ante where the book should be.

That evidence supports the theory of a last-minute decision to drop d20 Modern


----------



## arscott (May 20, 2006)

Morgenstern said:
			
		

> Fair enough. I'm just saying we should be examining their silence in light of past behavior. If they've been good about promptly announcing cancellations in the past, then this is odd. But 2 different distributors closing out their pre-orders sounds a lot like conducting business rather than saving face.



I don't think we've seen two different distributors cancelling.  I think we've just heard about Alliance cancelling from two different people.


----------



## hobgoblin (May 20, 2006)

well there is one up there that talks about hearing it directly from a WOTC person iirc...


----------



## M.L. Martin (May 20, 2006)

*OK, NOW I believe it.*

I got a chance to take another look at the WotC Sept--Dec 2006 catalog today.  Spectaculars isn't on the d20 Modern product listing in the back of the book.  That implies a delay or cancellation to me.

      d20 Dark*Matter is there, but not in the catalog.  I'm still waiting for the final word, but those backlists usually include only the stuff that's come out *before* the timespan the catalog starts.  Could it be that they decided to push d20 D*M up a month or two to fill Spectacular's slot, and the 3DA page is there just to avoid having to repaginate the whole catalog?

      That said, I'm not sure I trust even the catalog backlist.  The SW Minis game lists Ultimate Missions:  Universe, and there's no sign of that product *anywhere*.

     Matthew L. Martin


----------



## DragonLancer (May 20, 2006)

PoppaGunch said:
			
		

> Just got a message from the distributor, and it seems that this book has been canceled.  Not sure if anyone was anticipating it (I was), but I figured I would let people know.




Thats a shame, I was looking forward to that.  :\


----------



## philreed (May 20, 2006)

arscott said:
			
		

> I don't think we've seen two different distributors cancelling.  I think we've just heard about Alliance cancelling from two different people.




Alliance is the largest distributor for hobby gaming.


----------



## arscott (May 21, 2006)

Oh, I know.  I was just nitpicking.


----------



## Morgenstern (May 21, 2006)

No, it's fair. My bad. I thought Alliance and someone else had been involved on the distributing side.


----------



## Aristotle (May 23, 2006)

I swear I responded to this two days ago, but whatever... I just wanted to add, although I know it doesn't much matter, that I feel it would really hurt the game to see such an important supplement canned. D20 Modern is served best, in my opinion, by genre books that expand the potential of the game and better allow potential game masters the ability to run the campaigns they've envisioned without hours of haphazard house-ruling.

The recent books, while not ground breaking to everyone, have done this for several genres. I think the supers genre (and the many sub-genres it contains) is an important one among those that make up the basis for modern and postmodern campaign settings.


----------



## CSgeekHero (May 23, 2006)

JPL said:
			
		

> Well, I guess opinions vary as to who does stuff better.
> 
> I'm not sure what you have in mind as far as "retreads"...with a generic modern system, there are certain books that are sort of a given --- a sci-fi supplement, post-apocalypse, a book of weapons, some popular historical eras, etc.  Inevitably, if WotC doesn't get there quick, someone else will get there first.
> 
> Maybe the book got pulled because the whole line has been underperforming...that's plausable.  But based on Kenneth Hite's recent Out of the Box article about the extent to which WotC dominates the industry, I'm skeptical about 3rd party games stealing d20 Modern sales --- and I say that as both a fan and a designer of third party d20  products.



I respectfully disagree with your last sentence, not on the point of thrid party d20 publishers, but other publishers such as White Wolf, Steve Jackson Games, FanPro, and even Palladium. Look at this link to the Top 100 Games of 2005:link
d20 Modern did not make the list, but GURPS, Rifts, Shadowrun, and a couple of White Wolf products did make the list. Many gamers don't stick just with one system and those that do it is usually because it is popular(DnD) or fairly generic(GURPS). So, I think it is more of other systems stealing d20 Modern's sales. Particularly when you consider that d20 Past was so bad that you can get it for a song-and-a-dance and that hurt all supplements to follow. I never even bothered with looking at Cyberscape and I flipped through Future Tech and said, "Meh, it's bland like Milk of Magnesia."

To the people who are waiting for confirmation from WotC: I went to the d20 Modern main page in January of this year(2006) to see if they had anything on the main page for Future Tech and the Flash advertisement was still for d20 Past and d20 Apocalypse, which were both released in the first half of 2005. Now, they're advertising DnD products along with teasers for upcoming releases like Future Tech and Critical Locations. Plus, this wouldn't be the first time that they canceled a book so late in production. They also did it to the Star Wars RPG line with The Clone Wars Sourcebook.


----------



## buzz (May 23, 2006)

FWIW, there are currently (as of this posting) two WotC d20M books in the Amazon.com Top 100 bestsellers in the Gaming category. I've been checking the list about 1-2 times a week for the last couple months. There is always some d20M product on the list.

I'd like to see the book (I put in a preorder). I don't know if I buy they'd cancel so close to release, but I don't have any info that says one way or the other.


----------



## buzz (May 23, 2006)

CSgeekHero said:
			
		

> Look at this link to the Top 100 Games of 2005:link
> d20 Modern did not make the list, but GURPS, Rifts, Shadowrun, and a couple of White Wolf products did make the list.



This is a list of "...members of National Games Week... favorite games and the games played at their events." This list has nothing to do with sales or popularity. It's also mostly boardgames.



			
				CSgeekHero said:
			
		

> Many gamers don't stick just with one system and those that do it is usually because it is popular(DnD) or fairly generic(GURPS). So, I think it is more of other systems stealing d20 Modern's sales.



I think there's a host of speculation and synecdoche in that sentence. I also think the statement "most gamers don't stick with just one system" and the concept of "stealing sales" are mutually incompatible.


----------



## hobgoblin (May 23, 2006)

im picking up d20 modern books because i like the system, but am tired of fantasy.

so having a system that can do modern games, from every day to far future sci-fi to me is a must. if i could get superheroes on top of that, things would realy be interesting.

ok, sure, i could go gurps. but something about that system never ignited me the way d20 modern does. still, im a systems whore. if have the main books for atleast a dusin systems here. but only 2-3 of them go beyond that. those being d20 modern and shadowrun at the moment (and maybe witchcraft if i can get hold of two more in that series).


----------



## C. Baize (May 23, 2006)

hobgoblin said:
			
		

> im picking up d20 modern books because i like the system, but am tired of fantasy.
> 
> so having a system that can do modern games, from every day to far future sci-fi to me is a must. if i could get superheroes on top of that, things would realy be interesting.




Blood and Vigilance is a supers tack on, right over the top of D20 Modern. 
There are only a few new rules to learn. 
How the Power Points work.
Origins.
Stunts.
Knockback.

And it's all super simple. 
We've got a B&V game that's been going for a couple of years, now.
We do sort of a "round robin" GMing with it, that's reminiscent of different writers taking over the same comic book franchise for different story arcs. 
Works pretty neat that way.


----------



## CSgeekHero (May 24, 2006)

buzz said:
			
		

> This is a list of "...members of National Games Week... favorite games and the games played at their events." This list has nothing to do with sales or popularity. It's also mostly boardgames.



Well, I never intended it to be taken as a barometer of sales. Dismissing it out of turn when it comes to popularity due to the fact that it is mostly boardgames is short-sighted. When I read Ken Hite's Out of the Box about the market share of different game companies then look at the mentioned list, there does appear to be a correlation in terms of popularity.



			
				buzz said:
			
		

> I think there's a host of speculation and synecdoche in that sentence. I also think the statement "most gamers don't stick with just one system" and the concept of "stealing sales" are mutually incompatible.



Hmm, we seem to have a context disconnect here. The "most gamers don't stick with just one system" doesn't mean that I believed that they jump from system to system within one genre. For myself, and a few others I know, it is the idea of finding a system that they like for a particular genre and sticking with that system for that genre, then jumping systems for a different genre. For instance, someone might stick with Mutants and Masterminds for all their superhero gaming, but actually use HERO for pulp gaming. And so on. That is where it comes to stealing sales. I would never use d20 Modern/Future for a science fiction game. A hard sf game for me would feel best in GURPS, space opera style in HERO, Hard Nova][, or MnM depending on the level of crunch and tone of the campaign.  When it comes to fantasy it is either DnD or Fantasy HERO, depending upon the campaign. So, looking at it in that way the two statements aren't mutually incompatible.
No offense meant to anyone.


----------



## buzz (May 24, 2006)

CSgeekHero said:
			
		

> Well, I never intended it to be taken as a barometer of sales. Dismissing it out of turn when it comes to popularity due to the fact that it is mostly boardgames is short-sighted. When I read Ken Hite's Out of the Box about the market share of different game companies then look at the mentioned list, there does appear to be a correlation in terms of popularity.



Okay, but I wanted to maek clear that the list was simply the results of a survey of games played during a sponsred event, not a list of best-selling titles or anything. I didn't see it as really relevant to the discussion.



			
				CSgeekHero said:
			
		

> Hmm, we seem to have a context disconnect here. The "most gamers don't stick with just one system" doesn't mean that I believed that they jump from system to system within one genre. For myself, and a few others I know, it is the idea of finding a system that they like for a particular genre and sticking with that system for that genre, then jumping systems for a different genre. For instance, someone might stick with Mutants and Masterminds for all their superhero gaming, but actually use HERO for pulp gaming. And so on. That is where it comes to stealing sales. I would never use d20 Modern/Future for a science fiction game. A hard sf game for me would feel best in GURPS, space opera style in HERO, Hard Nova][, or MnM depending on the level of crunch and tone of the campaign.  When it comes to fantasy it is either DnD or Fantasy HERO, depending upon the campaign. So, looking at it in that way the two statements aren't mutually incompatible.
> No offense meant to anyone.



Not saying there was offense, I'm saying that you can only speak to you own experience. You're attributing behaviors to gamers as a whole based on no real data. E.g., what you say above isn't true for me. I.e., there are assumptions being made.


----------



## hobgoblin (May 24, 2006)

C. Baize said:
			
		

> Blood and Vigilance is a supers tack on, right over the top of D20 Modern.
> There are only a few new rules to learn.
> How the Power Points work.
> Origins.
> ...




call me old-school but i prefer hardcopys...

or atleast until i can get hold of a e-ink based pdf viewer that allows me to see a whole page at a time...


----------



## Wasgo (May 24, 2006)

hobgoblin said:
			
		

> call me old-school but i prefer hardcopys...
> 
> or atleast until i can get hold of a e-ink based pdf viewer that allows me to see a whole page at a time...



I would prefer hardcopies were it not for the fact that RPGObjects makes my favourite source books. They're cheaper, integrate well, and I always find them more fun than the WotC books. They're always really high quality, and I'd take them over an 'official' book any day of the week. Plus they always come with print versions that make the hardcopy dilemma a lot easier.


----------



## Owen K.C. Stephens (May 24, 2006)

Dang NDA.

I think I can safely say you won't be seeing Spectaculars in July. That doesn't mean you'll never see it, but I can't say you definitely will either.

The one thing I can say with absolutel certainty is that if the book never shows up, it's not because WotC decided to save money by doing freelancers dirty, as one poster suggested. WotC always pays for what it asks for, even if that book never gets used. I happen to know of at least one completed manuscript I wrote part of that has never seen light of day (and likely never will). I was paid in full, as was the other author on the book.

Also, the fact Spectaculars isn't showing up in July shouldn't be seen as a death knell for d20 modern in general. I'm not privvy to sales information or scheduling plans (and what I am privvy to I can't talk about), but the d20 Spectaculars issue isn't connected. While d20 Modern may or may not be selling like hotcakes, and may or may not have a robust set of releases in the near future, don't read anything into this one release not hitting shelves in 2 months.

I wish I could say more, but I don't know much and can't say what little I know. For those of you talking about looking for this book, apparently intently interested in what we've done with the mechanics, I thank you. Sorry, it won't be out in July. Hope we catch you later, on this or something else.

Owen K.C. Stephens
d20 Triggerman


----------



## jaerdaph (May 24, 2006)

Thanks, Owen.

Well, hopefully we will see it someday in some form or other. Hopefully it won't be too "mutated" from the original. In the meantime, I guess we'll just be "climbing the walls" waiting to see. 

Flame o... err GAME on!


----------



## C. Baize (May 24, 2006)

hobgoblin said:
			
		

> call me old-school but i prefer hardcopys...
> 
> or atleast until i can get hold of a e-ink based pdf viewer that allows me to see a whole page at a time...




*shrug* 
A lot of people want hard copy. 
We do, too. 
That's why 3/4 of my D20 collection is in binders, with sheet protectors.


----------



## hobgoblin (May 24, 2006)

well if i had access to a grayscale laser printer i would maybe go after the task of printing a 70+ page pdf. but right now i only have a ink-based printer, and one that cant be set to only print grayscale...


----------



## C. Baize (May 24, 2006)

hobgoblin said:
			
		

> well if i had access to a grayscale laser printer i would maybe go after the task of printing a 70+ page pdf. but right now i only have a ink-based printer, and one that cant be set to only print grayscale...




It's all good. 
Just tossing options out there.


----------



## jezter6 (May 24, 2006)

I swear. Every time I hear this I think about staying late and printing it out at work and charging someone $20 for it. 

Or maybe I should buy my own laser printer and get rich without getting fired for using 18 reams of paper a week on my office printer.


----------



## MoogleEmpMog (May 24, 2006)

Wasgo said:
			
		

> I would prefer hardcopies were it not for the fact that RPGObjects makes my favourite source books. They're cheaper, integrate well, and I always find them more fun than the WotC books. They're always really high quality, and I'd take them over an 'official' book any day of the week. Plus they always come with print versions that make the hardcopy dilemma a lot easier.




Back when RPGObjects put out wonderful softcover versions of their products, which I could actually find in stores, I ate them up (hugs precious copy of Blood & Fists).  Some of the best design work in the entire d20 field, certainly leagues ahead of what WotC was doing at the time.

I've yet to buy a PDF from them because a) I hate buying stuff online and b) I find PDFs immensely inconvenient.

I understand why many companies have had to move to PDF only, but those companies are essentially dead to me.  If I had to choose solely between hardcovers (ugh) and PDFs (quintuple ugh), I'd at least consider the PDFs, but as it stands I can still get at least some softcover d20 books.


----------



## PosterBoy (May 24, 2006)

MoogleEmpMog said:
			
		

> Back when RPGObjects put out wonderful softcover versions of their products, which I could actually find in stores, I ate them up (hugs precious copy of Blood & Fists).  Some of the best design work in the entire d20 field, certainly leagues ahead of what WotC was doing at the time.




We still print book.   We just release one a few days ago, one at gencon, and have more slated.  We don't do it as much, but actually finding in stores is the main issue. I can't easily fix.


----------



## buzz (May 24, 2006)

FYI:

http://printfu.org/


----------



## hobgoblin (May 24, 2006)

hmm, i just read about hte 100$ "laptop" over on slashdot. ok, so its more like 300$ if you want to get hold of one in the developed world as you hve to pay for two that will be given away to kids in the developing world. but anyways, it would be a nice device to read PDFs on  just fold it into "book" mode, fire up the pdf and presto...

hmm, the screen is in the 12" to 10,4" area of size, so i dont know how big the text will be  maybe the nokia 770 instead? how is it reading a pdf on the avarage PDA?

hmm, printfu. i wonder, do they ship to europe? or is there a similar service available there?


----------



## Wasgo (May 24, 2006)

hobgoblin said:
			
		

> how is it reading a pdf on the avarage PDA?



Painful. I wouldn't recommend it at all.


----------



## occam (May 24, 2006)

Cheezehog said:
			
		

> didn't Hasbro recently aquire the rights to produce marvel products?  If so, maybe WotC is working on a Marvel RPG.




Hmm... in the January 2006 press release from Marvel explaining the deal, Marvel chairman Morton Handel said:

Commencing in 2007, a wide range of toy and game categories – including action figures, *role play* and preschool toys, board games and puzzles – will be produced by our new licensee, Hasbro.


----------



## Kheti sa-Menik (May 24, 2006)

OStephens said:
			
		

> Dang NDA.
> 
> I think I can safely say you won't be seeing Spectaculars in July. That doesn't mean you'll never see it, but I can't say you definitely will either.
> 
> ...




This is all well and good, but I think it's owed to the consumer (not by you Mr Stephens, but by the company) to explain why such an anticpated product that has been advertised is being pulled.  I think more people would be a little more supportive of WOTC if there was a bit more transperancy.


----------



## philreed (May 24, 2006)

occam said:
			
		

> . . .  *role play* and preschool toys . . . URL]





By which they mean things like Hulk fists and feet and costumes. Check around and I think you'll find that "role play" has been used for toys in the past.

I'm not saying there won't be a Marvel RPG.  (How the hell would I know?)


----------



## elforcelf (May 24, 2006)

Wink.wink,nuge,nuge,know what I mean,eh? Phil?


----------



## HeapThaumaturgist (May 24, 2006)

Well, if Wizards DOES do a Marvel RPG, I do hope it is at least compatible with d20Modern.  I would imagine their deal with Marvel would probably prohibit them from releasing just a "supplement" to Modern for it.

Honestly?  I think it would work wonderfully if they just reproduced alot of the d20Modern material in a special hardback Marvel Supers RPG game.  I'm sure it would cheese off the d20Modern players who have to "pay" for "Stuff they already have" when they buy the book, but it might increase player-base for d20Modern.

--fje


----------



## RangerWickett (May 24, 2006)

hobgoblin said:
			
		

> well if i had access to a grayscale laser printer i would maybe go after the task of printing a 70+ page pdf. but right now i only have a ink-based printer, and one that cant be set to only print grayscale...




Just to give you a sense of what's available, if you'd like I could send you a complimentary copy of E.N. Publishing's d20 Modern superhero supplement.


----------



## hobgoblin (May 24, 2006)

unless its in a dead tree version, dont bother 

hmm, marvel rpg. didnt they release one that used counters rather then dice?


----------



## Krolik (May 24, 2006)

buzz said:
			
		

> FYI:
> 
> http://printfu.org/



 Yes. I get a lot of PDFs printed there as well and have never had a problem with them, and I am always pleased with the work. I recommend printfu to anyone who does not have a printer or does not want to spend the time doing it themself.


----------



## Graf (Jul 13, 2006)

That’s a shame. I was looking forward to this.
The last few modern books (more-random-futuristic-stuff!) haven’t been very interesting.
A super power focused game would have been cool.

While I’m no M&M expert the rules system for that game sounds completely different than “normal” modern.
I’d been keenly looking forward to a way to have a ruleset for adding super-abilities (or some super abilities) to a modern setting.

With the currency they burned producing some of the weaker books recently (past, and the could-have-been-great-but-we-had-to-rush Cyber-book) it would have been a bit tricky, but a good book could have built word of mouth and gotten Future-level sales I would think.

Still a marvel deal is big I suppose; and the spectaculars core could be used for a marvel game….
But “real” comic book universes are almost impossible to accurately portray in games. In the comics character’s abilities, personalities and backstories change to match the writer and plot. The superpowers are just for storytelling effect and work so differently its almost silly to try to make a (detail oriented DnD style) roleplaying game based around them.


----------



## buzz (Jul 13, 2006)

Graf said:
			
		

> But “real” comic book universes are almost impossible to accurately portray in games. In the comics character’s abilities, personalities and backstories change to match the writer and plot. The superpowers are just for storytelling effect and work so differently its almost silly to try to make a (detail oriented DnD style) roleplaying game based around them.



There are games like _Capes_, _With Great Power_, and _Truth & Justice_ that focus on the narrative elements of supers comics, rather than making an attempt to model supers-physics. I bet _Prime Time Adventures_ could work similarly.


----------



## Psion (Jul 13, 2006)

hobgoblin said:
			
		

> ok, sure, i could go gurps. but something about that system never ignited me the way d20 modern does.




Gah!

If you're gonna go non-d20 for you superheroic goodness, go HERO, not gurps.

I don't know what tweaks they made in GURPS 4e, but GURPS supers for 3e was a travesty. It just didn't scale up that well.


----------



## buzz (Jul 13, 2006)

Psion said:
			
		

> I don't know what tweaks they made in GURPS 4e, but GURPS supers for 3e was a travesty. It just didn't scale up that well.



They actually made it more HERO-like, in some ways. From what I hear (I have not played it), it handles supers a lot better than 3rd.


----------



## hobgoblin (Jul 13, 2006)

Psion said:
			
		

> Gah!
> 
> If you're gonna go non-d20 for you superheroic goodness, go HERO, not gurps.
> 
> I don't know what tweaks they made in GURPS 4e, but GURPS supers for 3e was a travesty. It just didn't scale up that well.




observe that i talk about d20 modern, not only d20 specteculars.
basicly its a comment about having a game that can do "everything" depending on what books you have available...


----------



## Krolik (Jul 13, 2006)

Both _Vigilance_ and _Red Star_ are d20 Modern superhero games. I am sure between the two of them someone would have more then enough options to play a d20 Modern supers' game if they wished.


----------



## Stormborn (Jul 13, 2006)

Krolik said:
			
		

> Both _Vigilance_ and _Red Star_ are d20 Modern superhero games. I am sure between the two of them someone would have more then enough options to play a d20 Modern supers' game if they wished.





Which?  This Red Star is an excelent product and based on a comic but is not a super hero game.  It is a game of science fiction and sorcery set in an alternate universe's Soviet Union.  Also, contrary to what that page says.  It is not based on the d20 Modern Rules. Instead it uses its own classes.


----------



## Ranger REG (Jul 14, 2006)

buzz said:
			
		

> They actually made it more HERO-like, in some ways. From what I hear (I have not played it), it handles supers a lot better than 3rd.



Meh. I'm still sticking with my _Mutants & Masterminds_ ruleset.


----------



## Ranger REG (Jul 14, 2006)

Graf said:
			
		

> While I’m no M&M expert the rules system for that game sounds completely different than “normal” modern.
> I’d been keenly looking forward to a way to have a ruleset for adding super-abilities (or some super abilities) to a modern setting.



Like adding _Superman Returns_ to _24_?


----------



## buzz (Jul 14, 2006)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> Meh. I'm still sticking with my _Mutants & Masterminds_ ruleset.



You go right ahead, young man. : pats head :


----------



## JohnSnow (Jul 14, 2006)

Duplicate Post...my mistake.


----------



## JohnSnow (Jul 14, 2006)

RangerWickett said:
			
		

> Just to give you a sense of what's available, if you'd like I could send you a complimentary copy of E.N. Publishing's d20 Modern superhero supplement.




Would that be an updated version of _Four Color to Fantasy?_ Cuz I don't know about him, but if it is, I'd LOVE a copy.

I actually had been hoping _d20 Spectaculars_ would be like an official _d20 Modern_-ized take along the same lines as that book.


----------



## Ranger REG (Jul 15, 2006)

buzz said:
			
		

> You go right ahead, young man. : pats head :



Boy, you better be twice my age to be pattin' my head.   

As for the thread, to be brutally honest, I find this lamentation of _d20 Spectaculars_ to be funny. At least when I'm having a bad day, I know where to go to cheer myself up.   

I mean, come on, gang, we _d20 Modern_ gamers should not be as worse as them _D&D_ label fans (which is one step below Nike shoe fans).  :\

Man up. Get _Blood and Vigilance_ or _Four Colors to Fantasy_ or _Paragon_ (internet) or _Powers Overwhelming_ (internet).


----------



## Roudi (Jul 15, 2006)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> Man up. Get _Blood and Vigilance_ or _Four Colors to Fantasy_ or _Paragon_ (internet) or _Powers Overwhelming_ (internet).



Well said!  Quoted for truth.


----------



## tetsujin28 (Jul 16, 2006)

Graf said:
			
		

> But “real” comic book universes are almost impossible to accurately portray in games.



Games like Universalis and Primetime Adventures do it swimmingly.


----------



## tetsujin28 (Jul 16, 2006)

buzz said:
			
		

> They actually made it more HERO-like, in some ways. From what I hear (I have not played it), it handles supers a lot better than 3rd.



GURPS Powers is a great, great book.


----------



## hobgoblin (Jul 16, 2006)

hmm, if i know the source of said games correctly, im guessing that they only do so by forgoing any kind of character crunch and only have ways for the players to take control of the story. sorry, but not what i prefer to call a rpg...


----------



## buzz (Jul 16, 2006)

hobgoblin said:
			
		

> hmm, if i know the source of said games correctly, im guessing that they only do so by forgoing any kind of character crunch and only have ways for the players to take control of the story. sorry, but not what i prefer to call a rpg...



That's a pretty narrow definition of an RPG, hob'. While the games tetsujin28 mentioned (what I assume you're referring to) and the ones I mentioned earlier may not be wargame-based, they are no less RPGs than HERO or M&M. Of course, they may certainly not be to your taste, which is cool.


----------



## hobgoblin (Jul 17, 2006)

its mostly the concepts behind the games that makes me go "hell no!".

and from what i understand, the theory that this games are based on cant realy be used to define the type of games that i define as roleplaying games...

basicly the games seems to rob the character of all that makes it the character.

both gurps and d20m/d&d is a bit to close to war games with their grid movement systems and all that. but these other games take it all the way out to the other extreme (story uber alles), and even more into the extreme then both gurps and d20m/d&d does towards war games.

i prefer a game where the numbers tells me something about the character and what he able and not able to do. these new style games toss this out, and for me thats basicly the same as tossing out the soul of a rpg.

no, im not a minmaxer or a munchkin, atleast not overt. i can gladly stop putting points into some skill or stat because i think that the number i have fits my view of how the character should be (given that in d20 have this kinda buildt in i may minmax it a bit more within the class. but i will pick classes for the concept, not to get the biggest BAB or similar).

in essence i prefer to call these new style games shared storytelling games or similar, not roleplaying games.


----------



## buzz (Jul 17, 2006)

hobgoblin said:
			
		

> i prefer a game where the numbers tells me something about the character and what he able and not able to do. these new style games toss this out, and for me thats basicly the same as tossing out the soul of a rpg.



You should be glad to hear, then, that the games mentioned don't do what you're claiming they do. (And games like M&M2e, with things like Complications and Hero Points [i.e., mechanics that toss narrative control around the table], aren't as different from them as you think.)


----------



## Bobitron (Jul 18, 2006)

buzz said:
			
		

> FYI:
> 
> http://printfu.org/




I gotta try that someday. Thanks for the link.



			
				Stormborn said:
			
		

> Which?  This Red Star is an excelent product and based on a comic but is not a super hero game.  It is a game of science fiction and sorcery set in an alternate universe's Soviet Union.  Also, contrary to what that page says.  It is not based on the d20 Modern Rules. Instead it uses its own classes.




Hey! Somebody else bought that? I figured I was the only one.

I would have purchased Spectaculars, but I'm pretty happy with M&M and I didn't feel the need for a new supers book. It's a shame to see a d20 Modern product taken off the schedule, but I have high hopes for new upcoming products.


----------



## Lord Mhoram (Aug 9, 2006)

hobgoblin said:
			
		

> in essence i prefer to call these new style games shared storytelling games or similar, not roleplaying games.




Yeah, that was pretty much my reaction when I read Capes. I can see how others would enjoy it, and see it as an RPG, but many of the things that define RPG to me aren't there.

As to the actual topic, I am saddened. I like D20 Modern, and was looking forward to see a different approach to d20 superheroes in print (rather than PDF which I generrally ignore). I don't especially care for M&M, so I was hoping this would be cool. Add that to the fact I find d20 modern one the best iterations of the d20 system, and love all the d20 future stuff.... 

*sigh*


----------



## Ranger REG (Aug 9, 2006)

Sheesh! Lament overmuch?

It will come. It just not as hot a product y'all put out to be, at least to me.



However, it is refreshing there are those who like _d20 Future,_ despite criticisms.


----------



## kingpaul (Aug 9, 2006)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> However, it is refreshing there are those who like _d20 Future,_ despite criticisms.



I like Future


----------



## Vigilance (Aug 9, 2006)

kingpaul said:
			
		

> I like Future




I like parts of it, which I suspect is how the book was designed to be used, as a great big ole toolkit. Too many people want it to be a cohesive whole I think and rate the book poorly as a result. 

Chuck


----------



## Ranger REG (Aug 9, 2006)

*Blatant Shameless Plug*

Buy _Blood and Vigilance._ "The Original _d20 Spectaculars._"


----------



## hobgoblin (Aug 11, 2006)

*waves the "i like d20 future" banner*


----------



## Ranger REG (Aug 11, 2006)

hobgoblin said:
			
		

> *waves the "i like d20 future" banner*



Dude, you're preaching to the choir. Make yourself useful and wave it in front of *Aussiegamer's* face.


----------



## Vigilance (Aug 11, 2006)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> Buy _Blood and Vigilance._ "The Original _d20 Spectaculars._"




Bless you my son.

Chuck


----------



## Greg K (Aug 11, 2006)

I pimp Blood and Fist, but Charles has never said "Bless you my son" to me.


----------



## Vigilance (Aug 11, 2006)

Greg K said:
			
		

> I pimp Blood and Fist, but Charles has never said "Bless you my son" to me.




Lol. B&Fists got nominated for an Ennie... pimping it is EXPECTED... EXPECTED I SAY!!!

Chuck

PS Bless you my son.


----------



## Graf (Aug 18, 2006)

buzz  said:
			
		

> There are games like Capes, With Great Power, and Truth & Justice that focus on the narrative elements of supers comics, rather than making an attempt to model supers-physics. I bet Prime Time Adventures could work similarly.



The first two sound interesting…. Thanks for the recommendation.



			
				tetsujin28 said:
			
		

> Games like Universalis and Primetime Adventures do it swimmingly.




Two votes for Primetime Adventures.
I admit to being slightly biases away from hard-core indie games. Anything less structured than Over the Edge has limited appeal to me. But obviously how much structure people like is a personal thing.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Aug 18, 2006)

> > This Red Star is an excelent product and based on a comic but is not a super hero game. It is a game of science fiction and sorcery set in an alternate universe's Soviet Union...
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Count me among the Komrades!

And the D20 Modern/Future fans too...

Oh- and M&M rocks!

So does Godlike!

Did I mention that I have another 6 or so supers games?  Or that HERO is my favorite RPG of all time?


----------



## ledded (Aug 18, 2006)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> Buy _Blood and Vigilance._ "The Original _d20 Spectaculars._"




Ditto on the pimpage.   Seriously.  I doubt WotC would have done that much of a better treatment as a whole, it just would have been shinier and with more art and a monkey-truck-load more expensive.   Heck, if I want superhero art, I've already got tons of that in boxes at home 

But I'm biased... my group has used BnV a good bit and we like it a lot.  It's straightforward, it's easy to pick up, and it's easy to add to d20 Modern.  Heck, our game was so much fun I wrote a mediocre story hour about it for a while.

Can I get a "bless you my son"?  

P.S.  I like d20 Future too.  As a toolkit.


----------



## Vigilance (Aug 18, 2006)

ledded said:
			
		

> Ditto on the pimpage.   Seriously.  I doubt WotC would have done that much of a better treatment as a whole, it just would have been shinier and with more art and a monkey-truck-load more expensive.   Heck, if I want superhero art, I've already got tons of that in boxes at home
> 
> But I'm biased... my group has used BnV a good bit and we like it a lot.  It's straightforward, it's easy to pick up, and it's easy to add to d20 Modern.  Heck, our game was so much fun I wrote a mediocre story hour about it for a while.
> 
> ...




Bless you my son.

BTW... I'm not ordinarily and indie games guy, but Truth and Justice is a game I'd recommend among the indie crop. But Im a sucker for supers games... I think I have all of them. I even got that Marvel game with the stones. 

Chuck


----------

