|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Jul 23, 2009 5:20:24 GMT -6
I don't know how much of a "scoop" this is, but I hang out on Craig Brain & Jim Ward's MA boards and hadn't heard anything solid about this, so..... There's a thread on RPG Net about how Metamorphosis Alpha is supposed to be getting another re-boot soon. And the game system is the D&D 4E one.  It doesn't totally surprise me, since Craig has been posting how he's been looking at 4E and likes the game system. I had thought that this was just a passing fancy of his, however, as opposed to looking into a new rules system to launch a product line. Here is a link to the company doing the game. I heard that most of the designers from Margaret Weis Games are on this project. Anyway, that's the news I hear on the Metamorphosis Alpha front.... |
|
|
|
Post by greentongue on Jul 23, 2009 6:02:02 GMT -6
I truely believe that Savage Worlds would be a much better choice but, there seems to be apathy to Savage Worlds among them. They chose "Two Fisted Tales" as a rules system alternative instead... I'm not sure what 4E is supposed to bring to the setting except "current" rules. (Until 5E anyway.) = |
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Jul 23, 2009 8:38:41 GMT -6
I assume that it's the "current rules" thing that is a big selling point, and perhaps the hope that they can get more copies into game stores if MA is based on 4E.
MA has always suffered from the lack of exposure, so maybe this will help out.
|
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Jul 23, 2009 8:47:52 GMT -6
Of course, it just occured to me that terminology in discussing this game will drive us nuts. Metamorphois Alpha 4E was based on the rules mechanic from 3E, but not the 3E you're probably thinking of, but Metamorphosis Alpha 3E. Also, Metamorphosis Alpha 5E is based on the rules outlined in 4E, but not Metamorphosis Alpha 4E I just mentioned but instead the other 4E. Get it?  |
|
|
|
Post by greentongue on Jul 23, 2009 11:23:28 GMT -6
I'm aware of MA1, MA2, MA3 and MA4.
I've played original MA. Glanced at the Amazing Engine version of the setting and was interested. Have never been interested in the others.
The later versions just never grabbed me for some reason.
=
|
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Jul 23, 2009 17:47:18 GMT -6
MA3E is kind of neat because it's so thin. It has a thickness similar to the 1976 1E book, which is really cool, only it uses a 3d6 mechanic instead of 1d20.
MA4E takes 3E and expands it a lot. This can be good or bad -- I like the stuff put into 4E but find the thin rulebook of 3E very comforting somehow.
If I had to rank them it might be as follows:
1. 1E - the original
2. 3E - thin, nice re-boot of the original
3. 4E - 3E on steroids
4. 2E - Amazing Engine is what?
Too early to know where 5E will rate amongst the others, but my guess is that it won't be #1 no matter how neat it is. The '76 book is just too tough to beat!
|
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Darke on Jul 23, 2009 18:17:55 GMT -6
I'm really surprised Jim didn't go with TLG and the SIEGE engine on this. TLG has fast tracked three of his projects already. So I don't know why they wouldn't do that with a SIEGE MA. An MA for TLG would be a coup for the company and it would be a win/win situation when Jim gets MA5 out quick and TLG gets a classic game into it's stable.
|
|
|
|
Post by coffee on Jul 23, 2009 23:30:56 GMT -6
Seems to me that the driving force these days is Craig Brain. I've only dealt with him a little, but he seems like a stand-up guy. Not that I'm implying that Jim is resting on his laurels or anything! He's still involved. But I get the impression that Craig is the real D&D 4e fan here. And there's nothing wrong with that. If it helps them sell more copies of the game, great. Us old farts still have access to the first edition (with errata yet!) for a mere $5.95 on RPG Now (here's a link: www.rpgnow.com/product_info.php?products_id=50526). So we needn't care what happens with any latter-day revision. Although I'm still working my way through it... |
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Jul 24, 2009 5:31:18 GMT -6
I'm really surprised Jim didn't go with TLG and the SIEGE engine on this. TLG has fast tracked three of his projects already. So I don't know why they wouldn't do that with a SIEGE MA. An MA for TLG would be a coup for the company and it would be a win/win situation when Jim gets MA5 out quick and TLG gets a classic game into it's stable. Yeah, I'm actually kind of bummed about this as well. I don't really know for myself whether D&D 4E is a passing fad for me or not, but I am certain that I'm going to be a C&C fan for a long time. With Jim's association with TLG, it is surprising that he didn't make that move. |
|
|
|
Post by greentongue on Jul 24, 2009 6:28:21 GMT -6
I'm likely wrong but, I get the feeling that the crunchy wargaminess of 4E would appeal to Jim.
=
|
|
|
|
Post by James Maliszewski on Jul 24, 2009 6:36:41 GMT -6
While I can't say that I'm thrilled with the rules choice, I'm not sure it matters in the end. Every re-release of MA has been hobbled in some way or other. I don't expect this new version to be any different. It's almost as if there were a curse upon the game.
|
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Jul 24, 2009 7:21:22 GMT -6
It's almost as if there were a curse upon the game. Which is a real shame, since it is a great setting. And some of the advanced plotlines with the Asteroid are great, if only they would see the light of day and get mainstream publication.  |
|
|
|
Post by coffee on Jul 24, 2009 9:08:58 GMT -6
That's kind of the thing, right there: It's a great setting. It's similar to Traveller in that regard (or Traveller is similar to M. A.), in that the setting seems to be the important thing regardless of the rules implementation.
Despite Jim's intention that every referee create their own starship, when you say "Metamorphosis Alpha" people think "Starship Warden". Similarly, when you say "Traveller" people think "Third Imperium".
Okay, that's not really deep or anything, but it's something I've noticed about Science Fiction games -- they don't seem as "generic" (or perhaps Universal) as fantasy games.
|
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Jul 24, 2009 10:15:53 GMT -6
something I've noticed about Science Fiction games -- they don't seem as "generic" (or perhaps Universal) as fantasy games. I wonder if that's why I'm so pumped up by C&C but really had no enthusiasm over StarSIEGE. Maybe SciFi games need a setting more for some reason. |
|
|
|
Post by coffee on Jul 24, 2009 11:15:11 GMT -6
I wonder if that's why I's so pumped up by C&C but really had no enthusiasm over StarSIEGE. Maybe SciFi games need a setting more for some reason. Whereas I was exactly the other way around. I can take or leave C&C, but I ran right out and bought StarSIEGE. But now I can't come up with a setting for it! The one that comes with the set doesn't really do much for me (although if I actually played it, it might grow on me). I really want to give the system a try, though, so I'm working on a one-off using the situation provided by Jonathan Coulton's song "Chiron Beta Prime" -- here's a video: |
|
|
|
Post by greentongue on Jul 24, 2009 11:20:08 GMT -6
I believe that there is no unified vision of what Sci-Fi is, heck, most people don't even seem to understand the difference between Sci-Fi and Sci-Fantasy.
This hampers its popularity as far as mass market is concerned.
Now settings, people can get behind those because they ARE well defined. Even if they don't like it, they agree on what it is.
=
|
|
|
|
Post by Craig J. Brain on Sept 13, 2009 15:22:41 GMT -6
I truely believe that Savage Worlds would be a much better choice but, there seems to be apathy to Savage Worlds among them. They chose "Two Fisted Tales" as a rules system alternative instead... I'm not sure what 4E is supposed to bring to the setting except "current" rules. (Until 5E anyway.) = Greentongue, Where do you get the idea that I don't like Savage Worlds? I like it, I just acknowledge that there are other decent games out there that can do some of the same things. If you read the capsule review I put on our forums, I chose Savage Worlds over 2FT. On top of that, I don't suppose you noticed that we have been supporting David Reeve's excellent Savage Worlds foray for some time? Craig J. Brain |
|
|
|
Post by Craig J. Brain on Sept 13, 2009 16:24:51 GMT -6
Seems to me that the driving force these days is Craig Brain. I've only dealt with him a little, but he seems like a stand-up guy. Not that I'm implying that Jim is resting on his laurels or anything! He's still involved. But I get the impression that Craig is the real D&D 4e fan here. And there's nothing wrong with that. If it helps them sell more copies of the game, great. Us old farts still have access to the first edition (with errata yet!) for a mere $5.95 on RPG Now (here's a link: www.rpgnow.com/product_info.php?products_id=50526). So we needn't care what happens with any latter-day revision. Although I'm still working my way through it... Coffee, This may surprise you - Jim told me that we were going to 4th Ed. D&D  This took me by surprise too  Jim was very keen to not use 3.0 or 3.5, so I was not expecting this. Jim still is very interested in MA, but is tied up with other projects, while I putter away on a couple of smaller projects for MA. Cam Banks and Jamie Chambers are the key guys for this new edition of MA, with a lot of guidance from Jim Ward and some input from me as well. I started looking into 4th Ed D&D after Jim told me about what he wanted to do. I had played a bit of 3.0 and slightly less 3.5. Personally, I believe that the first book will make mutants and tech available to a whole heap of settings using the 4th edition rules. Marketing-wise, that seems like a smart idea to me. With Jamie Chambers and Cam Banks working on this game, and seeing what they have done so far, this game is looking pretty good. I hope this explains a few decisions that have been made. Craig J. Brain |
|
|
|
Post by Craig J. Brain on Sept 13, 2009 16:30:19 GMT -6
I'm really surprised Jim didn't go with TLG and the SIEGE engine on this. TLG has fast tracked three of his projects already. So I don't know why they wouldn't do that with a SIEGE MA. An MA for TLG would be a coup for the company and it would be a win/win situation when Jim gets MA5 out quick and TLG gets a classic game into it's stable. Julian - To be honest, For my money, that's what I would have betted on too. D&D 4th Ed was a surprise, but Jim knows Jamie Chambers and Cam Banks and is confident that they can deliver. I was impressed with Cortex, Serenity and BSG, so am fairly confident that they'll do a good job with this too. Craig J. Brain |
|
|
|
Post by Craig J. Brain on Sept 13, 2009 16:34:22 GMT -6
While I can't say that I'm thrilled with the rules choice, I'm not sure it matters in the end. Every re-release of MA has been hobbled in some way or other. I don't expect this new version to be any different. It's almost as if there were a curse upon the game. James, I hope that we can prove you wrong here. About both the hobbling and the curse Craig J. Brain |
|
|
|
Post by greentongue on Sept 13, 2009 17:54:27 GMT -6
Greentongue, Where do you get the idea that I don't like Savage Worlds? I like it, I just acknowledge that there are other decent games out there that can do some of the same things. On your forum, under General Role Playing, there is a heading (with graphic) for Two-Fisted Tales but none for Savage Worlds. This in spite of the fact that many who post on the forum use SW but there is only 1 post under the Two-Fisted Tales heading, and that was by you. I don't begrudge you having your own opinion and favoring whichever rule system you want. I find it favorable that Savage Worlds provides a license for no fee. For a niche product, paying a license can be a big expense. I don't get the impression that the 4E license provides that much additional support for 3rd party vendors. Obviously it's your call. Good Luck with the venture. = |
|
|
|
Post by Craig J. Brain on Sept 13, 2009 22:45:02 GMT -6
On your forum, under General Role Playing, there is a heading (with graphic) for Two-Fisted Tales but none for Savage Worlds. This in spite of the fact that many who post on the forum use SW but there is only 1 post under the Two-Fisted Tales heading, and that was by you. I don't begrudge you having your own opinion and favoring whichever rule system you want. I find it favorable that Savage Worlds provides a license for no fee. For a niche product, paying a license can be a big expense. I don't get the impression that the 4E license provides that much additional support for 3rd party vendors. Obviously it's your call. Good Luck with the venture. = Greentongue, What about all the other games that I haven't reviewed and included a picture of? I may or may not be apathetic towards potentially thousands of them, and have no intention of posting my stance on each of them 2FT has a picture and a blurb because I picked up a copy recently. As does Chaosium's Basic Role Playing, and Summerland. I have an old copy of Savage Worlds which I am still fond of, but it isn't really fair to do a blurb about the new version based upon that. I haven't picked up the new version, and would not mind if somebody posted a review to the board. I spoke about using 2FT for pulp adventures, which has nothing to do with the decision to go with D&D 4.0 for the next edition of MA. I was not aware that WoTC was charging for a license now, and will have to look into that. I did say: I mentioned Earth AD 2 because it is one of the company's earlier efforts that I happen to have picked up quite some time ago*. Claiming that we are apathetic towards somebody else's product simply because I have not posted a review with a picture is a little unfair, don't you think? I like Savage Worlds, but I can see why somebody would enjoy 2FT and stick with that if they were happy. As for not looking after the Savage World supporters, about 2 weeks ago I created the topic logo for the Savage Worlds Toolkit logo and posted it to the forums. You would have seen this when you made your last post on our boards (Sep 12). Again, it's not under the reviews, because I haven't done a review. Plus, the topic just seemed to "grow" there. I don't actively play Savage Worlds, and I don't feel particularly well-placed to offer advice on running it, but we have been supporting it openly on the forums since July. On the old forums we also supported other versions of MA using rule sets such as ICE's SpaceMaster and d20. I never expected that we would be accused of bias against a system because we let people talk openly about other games on our boards. If this has honestly been seen to be a problem, please contact us via our boards and I'll discuss removing all non-MA material with Jim Ward. Regards, Craig J. Brain * BTW, Yes, I haven't reviewed Earth AD 2 either, but if I do get around to it, it will be glowing I like that game too. |
|
|
|
Post by tavis on Sept 14, 2009 4:58:33 GMT -6
Once upon a time there was talk of allowing some publishers to get early access to the 4E rules by paying $5,000, which would allow them to release D&D compatible products sooner than those who didn't pay. Due to delays with the Game System License, that never came to pass; using the GSL has always been free-as-in-beer.
The biggest advantage of using the GSL is supposed to be that you can actually say it's compatible with D&D, instead of having to use the euphemism "world's most popular fantasy roleplaying game". My armchair analysis is that this hasn't meant all that much; the bias for "official" material is stronger than ever, so that "compatible" isn't that attractive. However, I often see 4E fans online talking about how cool it would be to use the system to do different genres, but as far as I know no such product has been released yet - it seems to me like MA could succeed by offering an experience that's rules-familiar to RPGA players, but plays very differently than "official" adventures.
As a fan of MA, though, what matters most to me is that this is the way the original creator of the game wants to do it. Seems to me Jim has a history of using the D&D rules to do weird things, which I think is awesome - at Gen Con I picked up an adventure of his that'd been cut out of the pages of an '80s-era Dragon magazine, in which the players were basically Boy Scouts in a haunted house; it had no real dungon-fantasy trappings, as I recall, and the characters were 0-level so they had no D&D abilities per se, but it specifically said to use the AD&D rules.
|
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Sept 14, 2009 9:40:05 GMT -6
As a fan of MA, though, what matters most to me is that this is the way the original creator of the game wants to do it. Seems to me Jim has a history of using the D&D rules to do weird things, which I think is awesome... I agree, but I find it a little disappointing that there are so many variations of MA because this means that no single edition gets the product support it deserves. (Take for example D&D, where OD&D-B/X-AD&D-2E and other editions were very similar to one another, but 3E-3.5 is different and 4E is even more different. One can't simply take a 4E product and use B/X instead without major conversion.) I like 1E the best, but really enjoyed the 3d6 system from 3E and had a blast playtesting and helping to expand 4E. I'm surprised to see another rules version so quickly because I really thought that MA4E would last for a while. I am doubly surprised that if a new edition were to be made that it won't follow C&C, but instead would go to WotC's 4E because it is so different from previous editions of either MA or D&D. Basically, edition conversion won't be simple and product compatibility will diminish somewhat. (It's the same basic problem I have with the MA2E for Amazing Engine -- it just isn't very compatible with 1E or 3E/4E Meta Alpha.) I support Craig and Jim and wish the Metamorphosis Alpha franchise the best, but I wish the game would embrace the "old school" feel a bit more. Somethimes I just feel like 1E is being left behind....  |
|
|
|
Post by tavis on Sept 14, 2009 11:17:35 GMT -6
I feel your 1E pain, Fin, and your point about fragmenting the market for MA support (with 4E more likely than ever to create untranslatable material) is a good one.
On the other hand, I feel like some 4E cornerstones like highly potent, supranormal abilities that can either be used continuously or only after minutes or hours go by & allow them to recharge make more sense for a setting full of psionic powers and technological devices than they do for, well, D&D.
|
|
|
|
Post by greentongue on Sept 14, 2009 11:51:46 GMT -6
Claiming that we are apathetic towards somebody else's product simply because I have not posted a review with a picture is a little unfair, don't you think? Anytime you provide more coverage of one product over another you run the risk of projecting favortism. Especially when big splashy graphics are used for highlighting. As I said before, I have no issue with you favoring whichever you want, it is your board after all. My point is that it does imply apathy to those not given equal treatment. (intentional or not) Enough of this. I made my point. You responded clearly. There is no requirement for you to justify your choice to me, but it is nice that you did. I truely hope that your choice is/was the correct one for the best results for MA. = |
|
|
|
Post by Craig J. Brain on Sept 14, 2009 14:07:01 GMT -6
Anytime you provide more coverage of one product over another you run the risk of projecting favortism. Especially when big splashy graphics are used for highlighting. As I said before, I have no issue with you favoring whichever you want, it is your board after all. My point is that it does imply apathy to those not given equal treatment. (intentional or not) Enough of this. I made my point. You responded clearly. There is no requirement for you to justify your choice to me, but it is nice that you did. I truely hope that your choice is/was the correct one for the best results for MA. = Greentongue, In other circumstances I would laugh at this situation. We are about to embark on publishing a new version of the game using D&D 4th Ed rules, yet I find myself defending our decision to show support to a competing product (of D&D), Savage Worlds, to a Savage Worlds fan. It's a little like Ford fans accusing GM fans of bias after GM fans admit that the Fords did well. True, I can choose to support whatever I like on the board, it comes with the territory when you pay for privilege. I will continue to post these capsule reviews based upon whatever products I pick up in future that I think might interest people. If we do get serious complaints about these reviews, as I offered previously, Jim Ward and I will look at removing all non-MA material. We can't be fairer than that. As for the rest of your point: From FreeDictionary.com: Apathy 1. Lack of interest or concern, especially regarding matters of general importance or appeal; indifference. Bias may have been a better word, though still untrue in what you have accused us of. You had to go past the Savage Worlds material, which BTW has one of the "biggest splashiest graphics" that I have given any of the forum topics in order to make your post on the 12th of September. You know we have shown plenty of interest towards Savage Worlds, and have encouraged others to do so. You already know that there is a heap of posts under that topic, and only one or two under 2FT, yet you still claim that we are favoring 2FT over SW? Seriously, who are you kidding? Your original point was not that we showed apathy towards all the games that we had not covered, your original point specifically named "Savage Worlds". That was not true. Now you have changed "your point" to mean "that it does imply apathy to those not given equal treatment. (intentional or not)". That is a different kettle of fish, and again an unfair accusation against us. On the 25th on November 2008, I posted in the first post on the "Other Games" topic - right at the top under the cunning heading of "Aim"(You had to go past it to read about 2FT): When somebody attributes behavior to Jim or I and claims that this has not been a good thing - such as claiming that we have shown apathy towards Savage Worlds - it damages the reputation of Jim and I as well as our forums. We know that there are a lot of Savage World fans out there. It makes good business sense to answer those accusations clearly. Especially when those accusations are untrue. The outcomes are seldom good though, as it always leaves the accused (in this case us) vulnerable to accusations of over-responding etc. Greentongue, to be clear, you have not made your point. You have shown that despite the evidence, you are unwilling to concede that your original accusation against us of being apathetic towards Savage Worlds is untrue. You have tried to shift attention to the apparent lack of coverage of other RPGs. We have actively provided opportunity for other RPGs, and invited comment, which proves your new accusation untrue as well. You would be welcome to post a review of Savage Worlds if this would negate the "apathy" that you perceive and I would be happy to put a graphic there as well. I have no issue with that. Craig J. Brain |
|
|
|
Post by Craig J. Brain on Sept 14, 2009 14:28:10 GMT -6
As a fan of MA, though, what matters most to me is that this is the way the original creator of the game wants to do it. Seems to me Jim has a history of using the D&D rules to do weird things, which I think is awesome... I agree, but I find it a little disappointing that there are so many variations of MA because this means that no single edition gets the product support it deserves. (Take for example D&D, where OD&D-B/X-AD&D-2E and other editions were very similar to one another, but 3E-3.5 is different and 4E is even more different. One can't simply take a 4E product and use B/X instead without major conversion.) I like 1E the best, but really enjoyed the 3d6 system from 3E and had a blast playtesting and helping to expand 4E. I'm surprised to see another rules version so quickly because I really thought that MA4E would last for a while. I am doubly surprised that if a new edition were to be made that it won't follow C&C, but instead would go to WotC's 4E because it is so different from previous editions of either MA or D&D. Basically, edition conversion won't be simple and product compatibility will diminish somewhat. (It's the same basic problem I have with the MA2E for Amazing Engine -- it just isn't very compatible with 1E or 3E/4E Meta Alpha.) I support Craig and Jim and wish the Metamorphosis Alpha franchise the best, but I wish the game would embrace the "old school" feel a bit more. Somethimes I just feel like 1E is being left behind.... Marv and Tavis, I agree. I would like to see consistency in the editions, and wish that could have been achieved. Unfortunately, with five different editions with four different publishers - there's going to be different POVs. Hopefully Signal Fire Studios will be releasing MA7e in 2034, figures crossed (Bonus point for the Car Wars fans if they can tell me why it might not!) The beauty of MA5e using the 4th Ed. D&D rules is that when 5th Ed D&D comes out, folks can convert their stuff to that, there are converters to convert characters back to 3.5, and converting MA1e to D&D 4th Ed, isn't going to be that great a challenge. I do acknowledge that game has changed a lot since 1976 But your MA1e and even MA2e characters should still be "translatable". MA3e and MA4e are going to be problem children, they are set right after the disaster and if WoTC were to release a D&D 4th Ed Modern ruleset, there could be an opportunity there as well. But, it's no secret that Metamorphosis Alpha, just hasn't been that lucky For future versions of the game, D&D is pretty much the Lingua Franca of the gaming community and will likely remain so for a long time. Hopefully this will alleviate some of the problems in future. Craig J. Brain |
|
|
|
Post by Craig J. Brain on Sept 14, 2009 14:44:05 GMT -6
I support Craig and Jim and wish the Metamorphosis Alpha franchise the best, but I wish the game would embrace the "old school" feel a bit more. Somethimes I just feel like 1E is being left behind.... Marv, Thanks You've been a massive help with the work we've been doing with getting MA back on it's feet and into the marketplace again. We haven't forgotten the old school stuff - we are still working on Starship Geomorphs which has a very old school feel about it and we are sourcing artwork for The House On The Hill adventure, based upon the Round House Modular Dwelling Unit on page 27 of the MA1e rules book WardCo. is a very small, independent company that pretty much runs off our pocket money. Everything takes time. So much time... So those little old school products will take a while. SignalFire Studios, by comparison is a behemoth and will be able to publish more stuff than WardCo. for the new edition, far more quickly, using contemporary standards. The way I see it, there will be stuff for old school and stuff for the newer game fans too. I hope that helps, Craig J. Brain P.S. Email sent to your .aol address. |
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Sept 15, 2009 19:14:34 GMT -6
Where do you get the idea that I don't like Savage Worlds? I like it, On your forum, under General Role Playing, there is a heading (with graphic) for Two-Fisted Tales but none for Savage Worlds. This in spite of the fact that many who post on the forum use SW but there is only 1 post under the Two-Fisted Tales heading, and that was by you. In Craig's defense, as a board moderator I find myself building sections of the board along the lines of games I personally have interest, and this may or may not 100% match the interests of my posters. My solution eventually is to take low-post sections (such as Boot Hill, Colonial Gothic or Warriors of Mars) and move them to low traffic areas. Craig may eventually take sections like Two Fisted Tales and merge them together in much the same way, so as to not clutter space so much. Also, if there is enough discussion of Savage Worlds (or any other rules set used with MA) I'll bet it would get its own section as well. I'm not speaking for Craig, just guessing what he might do based on how I run this board. So, my suggestion would be to post more SW discussion on the MA boards. (Or even post it here. He'll see the enthusiasm.) Craig is such a Metamorphosis Alpha fanatic, if there is enthusiasm for MA of any rules set I'll bet he'll encourage it. Just my two domars.  |
|
This took me by surprise too 
Jim was very keen to not use 3.0 or 3.5, so I was not expecting this.
