Jump to content

Why Magic World Failed


Recommended Posts

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Replies 110
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Here are some of my thoughts on Magic World. Most of its launch, support, and marketing efforts predate the current Chaosium management team. You can refer to us as "nu-Chaosium" if you wish, but it s

No one buys a game if they don't know there's a game to buy. Magic World wasn't promoted or supported in any significant way. So why would sales be anything but low? Most of us only knew about it beca

AS Ben has pointed out - the original plan as far as he was aware was to produce a low cost entry game, comprehensive and concisely laid out (channelling the games fore-bear Elric!, rather than the lo

Posted Images

I strongly disagree with all this. I did mastered Magic World. And I'll surely master it again. So for me it never failed!!!

... of course, I'm a real dumb in business and economics... 😜

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

I loved MW and still do. I never quite got on with the RQ idea of you, me your gran and misses Fig the squib out of Harry potter can all cast magic. If magic is universal then everybody has to be able to cast or they lose and that was never for me. I was never a great fan of Glorantha. I have spent many an hour or three reading endless texts about some tribe, god or some other thing, only to think "look, can I just be a dwarf and live in the Iron hills and carry an axe". 

I loved the power of the magic, the danger of the combat and the high ability scores. Do you remember OSR D&D where you could be a wizard and at level one had 1 spell that you could cast once per day and 1d4 Hit points and could roll a one.

I loved the high fantasy nature of MW and the game system worked. For me it had the original RPG feel with a really functioning game system.  The world was super simple, so I could refit it to my tastes. Of course it wouldn't be so "Bland and generic", if a particular game company we all know had bothered to support the product line. 

But sure, Chaosium had some problems back then and it's understandable that a nice game with low sales that didn't make much money got dropped. Why would you write for a game that didn't make much money when you could write for a much more famous one that did. 

I still play MW. I just keep going back to it. It was one of the easiest sells to my gaming group that I have ever had. In the first few sessions we travelled a bit, had a fight with some monsters, sacked a ruin, cast some magic and everybody said, "Hey this is great". It wasn't pretentious. It was simple good fun. 

 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/25/2021 at 5:57 PM, Rick Meints said:

yes.

A POD version of Magic World without the most glaring typos that plagued the print version would be very nice - BTW I think the PDF already rectifies some of the typos.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, smiorgan said:

 BTW I think the PDF already rectifies some of the typos.

The last update at drivethru is from the July 17th, 2015. So I don't think that there happened a lot of correction.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, NurgleHH said:

The last update at drivethru is from the July 17th, 2015. So I don't think that there happened a lot of correction.

I think the first release of the PDF was on 5/13/15 so the one you see would be the later revision. Also there was a 2 page errata document from December of 2014. Hopefully most of those corrections made it to the newer document.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

On 4/6/2021 at 12:40 PM, NurgleHH said:

The last update at drivethru is from the July 17th, 2015. So I don't think that there happened a lot of correction.

I bought a spare hard copy form Chaosium last year, and thus got an official copy of the latest PDF direct from Chaosium, which has the same created time stamp (17/07/2015, 17:48:35).

I think, but have not actually done a careful sweep, that there are some further typos and minor omissions that have come to light in the subsequent 6 years.

Big Jack Brass collated / saved for posterity Ben's original errata listing, plus some additional items IIRC, and I think most were included in the revised PDF.

One genuinely constructive thing those of us with access to the latest PDF (mine is called "magic_world_revised.pdf") could do is to comb our PDFs for all such typographical errors / oversights that other users might appreciated knowing about and compile a further errata list.

Such a comprehensive list of typographical errors could also be of use for Chaosium in prepping a PoD version, if that ever happens. It's hard to see they'd want to dedicate the resource to any substantive revision of layout / art, but simple typographical mistakes etc one would hope could be accommodated, and if there's already a robust list to work from it can only make that easier.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
On 4/9/2021 at 3:56 AM, NickMiddleton said:

 

I bought a spare hard copy form Chaosium last year, and thus got an official copy of the latest PDF direct from Chaosium, which has the same created time stamp (17/07/2015, 17:48:35).

I think, but have not actually done a careful sweep, that there are some further typos and minor omissions that have come to light in the subsequent 6 years.

Big Jack Brass collated / saved for posterity Ben's original errata listing, plus some additional items IIRC, and I think most were included in the revised PDF.

One genuinely constructive thing those of us with access to the latest PDF (mine is called "magic_world_revised.pdf") could do is to comb our PDFs for all such typographical errors / oversights that other users might appreciated knowing about and compile a further errata list.

Such a comprehensive list of typographical errors could also be of use for Chaosium in prepping a PoD version, if that ever happens. It's hard to see they'd want to dedicate the resource to any substantive revision of layout / art, but simple typographical mistakes etc one would hope could be accommodated, and if there's already a robust list to work from it can only make that easier.

That’s a good idea. That would allow some of the more egregious errors to be corrected.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...