Jump to content

auyl

Regulars
  • Posts

    365
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

Everything posted by auyl

  1. As was said by others they weren't meant to be high quality but rather test beds for possible material. As is the case with any company, I've seen official books that were not worth what I paid for them and should have relegated to a monograph comparable publication. I still support monographs because they allow for more possible material at a lower cost.
  2. I do the same in my Legend campaigns. Heroes have more hp while the typical enemies have the standard. Just makes heroes more well ... heroes!
  3. I like the concept of this rule as I realize Magic World is meant to be gritty but I've always like cinematic high fantasy so higher hit points have always appealed to me. I might do as Chaot suggested however and increase the hit points by 1 instead of 1d4. And I'd personally make them like Chris said, have them have to heal the major wound naturally and have to pass a Constitution improvement to do so.
  4. I would agree with you. Some of the monographs I have are actually better than some official products, but on the same token, some are not. But I would like to see the line improved and expanded upon just as you have said rather than scraped altogether.
  5. If that was you, I get that can be frustrating. I've personally had to deal with that from another company that will remain unnamed. However I don't see that as a reason not to do the monographs. All small staff companies have issues with tracking stock, some even losing track of unthinkable amounts of monies worth.
  6. I'm intrigued by this and where it could go, unfortunately I don't really have the time. I might be willing to give this a go if I'm writer-blocked on my other major project, but no promises.
  7. Alright, that makes more sense. I can understand them not wanting to give out that information especially if it isn't favourable. For instance, saying that a product is selling well (if it is) is fine, but saying that a product isn't selling at all wouldn't be the best strategy. I personally wouldn't spend the energy saying how poorly an item is selling to just some random person who is calling, but would rather use my business skills to upsell that product instead.
  8. This is pretty much what I was thinking as well. Don't stop them from coming in, but let people buy them as they want them, that way there's very little to do but hopefully pay the contributor. Again, that can be difficult at times, I understand that, but DTRPG records how many of each item you've ever sold, so if they stick by the $250/500 unit pay rate, they could easily keep track of how many of each are sold.
  9. Hey all, just a reminder that this is the final weekend of Solace Games' sale on PDF's and POD titles. PDF's are 50% off and POD are 25% off all in celebration of Free RPG Day tomorrow! Get your titles here!
  10. True but we don't know what will happen with the change in leadership. Things might get done sooner. I just don't think they should abandon the monogrsphs altogether.
  11. I disagree, I love the monograph idea. True, they may not be as top quality as the regular books, but they are some real gems in it for instance Basic Fantasy. It allows emerging writers to get work out there with very little work for Chaosium and allows for an almost unlimited idea stream for the games and the company to work with. I hope they continue this idea.
  12. I don't restrict the use of electronic items at my gaming table but I prefer to use dead-tree books myself, I just find it easier to reference a book since I usually am able to remember where things are in a book a rather than an electronic one.
  13. I don't doubt that you're right. Too bad 3PP don't get as much in the way of sales compared to Chaosium itself that they could take the job of publishing. I'm thinking of renewing my license now that there is new leadership and focusing on BRP/MW
  14. Although I'd prefer BRP then MW anything outside of CoC would be nice
  15. With my gaming company I used to do projects in 8.5x11 but didn't really care for it. I preferred the Digest format so if BGB's various companions were Digest that would suit me just find. Malleus Monstrorum is more for CoC than for BRP in general. There are lots of unique monsters you could bring into a BGB supplement than a CoC one. So yes, Malleus Monstrorum could make a monster resource, I would rather see it stay as a CoC one and come up with something specifically for BGB.
  16. If they can bring more MW out I'd be happy. I also wish they'd do more with Nephilim but that's wanting too much I know. But more general support for BGB would make me the happiest. I'm thinking once CoC 7e is done and some books for it are out the new team will give BGB some love.
  17. I'm glad there is such a shift at the Chaosium offices. Charlie was a great guy don't get me wrong, but I still think it was time for a change. Hopefully Greg and Sandy can get the ball rolling again and I can put my faith back into the company. Would like to see other lines supported other that just CoC and with these changes maybe we'll finally see these kinds of products!
  18. I'd prefer a book about the size of the BGB. An all inclusive volume that allows for greater sandbox. If not that then separate volumes for different base genres.
  19. A companion would be good. If it offered alternate rules and like the core book said, more powers, spells etc. then I would put money down for that.
  20. I started playing the d100 system with CoC6E and BRP but liked the RQ6 and Legend rules more to my liking. If they adapted similar rules for BRP I'd be all over that. However, I know people like the rules as is, which I'm not saying are bad, there's lots of good stuff in the BGB that I'd like to see in RQ6 and Legend but obviously for licensing reasons it won't happen.
  21. Unfortunately they only did what seemed like a limited playtest where the only ones playtesting where ones who were going to tell them how great it was no matter what. On the yog-sothoth forums there was a lot of disagreement with the new rules. A majority of people who saw the rules (I take it illegally) but weren't invited to playtest didn't like them. If they did an open playtest and did surveys like WotC did they would haveca system everyone liked. In fact WotC was putting out questions before the first plsytest even went out.
  22. I've personally always enjoyed the high role-playing aspect of any d100 system, but I wouldn't mind seeing some alternate rules to the BGB to make it more cinematic if one wanted to.
  23. I'd prefer BGB to stay as is. Still not sure how I feel about CoC 7e. Will probably have to play it more to get a feel for it.
  24. I prefer FtF. I've done the whole Roll20 and Skype gaming and didn't care for it. Don't get me wrong, it's a handy tool if you're in a secluded place or else don't know any other gamers in your area, but it just wasn't the same for me. I've always preferred to roll dice, mark the advancements and defeats on my sheets and recently making 3D card stock buildings for the miniature part of the game.
×
×
  • Create New...