I fear diversity

[Zulgyan]

Ok, this post is not very "nice", but I feel I need to say it.

I would prefer the zine to be more focused in OD&D and not diversify it too much into other games. Some is Ok, but not too much.

I fear that a liberal diversification that includes retro-clone and games not from the 70s-era might lower the value of the zine. Encounter Critical seems an exception since it's so well done though.

Just a thought...

I know this is sounding very politically incorrect. Excuse me. I just want the best for the zine and this is just an opinion.

[settembrini]

I can understand your sentiment.
But the answer is not to shun diversity, the answer would be to have more magazines like Fight On!

[Zulgyan]

Oh yes! I totally support the idea of more zines like Fight On!

I would only prefer if Fight On! is more focused in OD&D.

But I'm totally OK if it isn't, and I will continue supporting it. Just an opinion, that might be totally wrong.

[coffee]

I think that the fact that D&D is the first, the best, and by far the most popular will ensure that the bulk of the content focuses on D&D.

Remember, other games are just house-ruled D&D (some of them heavily house-ruled).

[James Maliszewski]

Apr 21, 2008 11:30:28 GMT -6 Zulgyan said:

Ok, this post is not very "nice", but I feel I need to say it.

I would prefer the zine to be more focused in OD&D and not diversify it too much into other games. Some is Ok, but not too much.

I agree with you on this point, at least until Fight On! has several more issues under its belt. I think, for the short term, it should remain focused on OD&D, with the occasional article of interest for other old school games (like EPT, for example). Like Dragon of old, though, there should always be room for exceptional submissions for any game system. I'd hate to see truly good articles rejected simply because of the game system. I think the best approach would be to keep an OD&D focus, but keep an open mind for noteworthy submissions for any old school game.

[calithena]

What Coffee said.

Also, I posted a new thread addressing these issues.

[Finarvyn]

Apr 21, 2008 11:30:28 GMT -6 Zulgyan said:

I would prefer the zine to be more focused in OD&D and not diversify it too much into other games. Some is Ok, but not too much. I know this is sounding very politically incorrect. Excuse me. I just want the best for the zine and this is just an opinion.

Actually, this is the same basic issue that we run into for the entire board. I like an OD&D emphasis but have allowed some other early RPG posts and threads and online games.

I don't want to sound too elitist, but the intent of the boards was always OD&D, and I kind of wish that the emphasis of Fight On! would stay that way as well. Nothing against EPT or other games of the era, but the more we "water down" the content, the less OD&D-special Fight On! becomes. That's why I'm trying to keep a handle on the non-OD&D or non-TSR content on the boards. It's not that I don't like the other games, but I don't want a generic board.

I suppose the real answer is that I should contribute OD&D material to Fight on!, and if I don't contribute I shouldn't complain. I do agree with your general sentiment, however, and thought I would toss in my two coppers worth.

[jrients]

I welcome diversity. But then I always preferred it when Dragon focused on D&D but had room for other games as well. Personally, that's what I want out of Fight On! as well: mostly OD&D but open to the infinite possibilities to be found in other games.

[coffee]

I always hated it when the Dragon had a whole issue devoted to other games, especially games I didn't play.

As long as the core content of Fight On! is OD&D, I don't mind a few other games getting some coverage. But if we had, say, an All-EPT issue, I probably wouldn't get that one. I'm not saying I wouldn't find anything in there that would be useful to me, I'm just saying it's not my game.

[calithena]

I wouldn't fear dilution. I'm hoping for the kind of synergy Dragon got early on, that jreints alludes to. Also, for these other games I plan to focus hard on stuff like adventures, monsters, magic items, etc. that can be easily picked up for play in the generic fantasy system of your choice.

Or rather, you can fear dilution, but the core of the mag will always be what people here want it to be - I'm not planning on diluting stuff. EPT adventures can be played by D&D characters. M&M and EC adventures are a little harder but can be run pretty much straight up as well.

Another way to put this: OD&D and the games that grew up around it were toolkit games, homebrewer's games. Part of that legacy is games that are close to it in spirit, mechanics, or both that contribute to an individual GMs interpretation of the rules and open up different possibilities.

Whenever I look at a submission for a different game system, I'm going to look at it in that light: does this work for a GM who's running an old-school fantasy game to tack on or maybe crib stuff s/he likes from?

If it does, then great. If not, I won't use it.

Or to put it another way, pushing the boundaries is part of what I think OD&D and other old school games are all about. If stuff for closely related systems helps us do that, I think we want it. If not, we won't use it.

Something like an EPT or M&M adventure, which can be run practically as is for an OD&D, Arduin, Warlock, BD&D, Thieves' Guild, etc. etc. character without even translating it seems like a no-brainer to me if it's good. On the other hand, an article detailing a new class for M&M would probably have to be (a) really, really excellent and (b) presented with GFS ("Generic Fantasy System") mechanics alongside, if needed to get accepted. And somebody's home take on Tekumel history wouldn't make the cut at all unless it happened to include a lot of monsters or spells with game-usable stats type of stuff.

We are and will be what we said we were.

Let's focus on writing good old-school content, the rest will take care of itself.

[Finarvyn]

Sorry, Calithena, if things sound so negantive. I don't think that this was my intent (or Zulgyan's either). I know that I was simply echoing some of the general sentiments stated here earlier.

Apr 24, 2008 13:51:30 GMT -6 calithena said:

I'm hoping for the kind of synergy Dragon got early on...

you can fear dilution, but the core of the mag will always be what people here want it to be...

games that are close to [OD&D] in spirit, mechanics, or both that contribute to an individual GMs interpretation of the rules and open up different possibilities.

Something like an EPT or M&M adventure, which can be run practically as is for an OD&D, Arduin, Warlock, BD&D, Thieves' Guild, etc. etc. character without even translating it seems like a no-brainer to me if it's good.

If we can achieve something similar in tone to the earlier Dragon magazines, that would be fantastic! I don't really "fear" diversity as much as hope that we can remain OD&D focused most of the time. Not only as there been no clear sign that the magazine is planning on jumping ship, your comments make me believe that philosophically we're all on the same page!

I should actually learn to shut up until I at least get a chance to read my copy of Fight On!.

[Zulgyan]

Yes, we just want the mag to rock and just offer our opinion if it can be of any help. My proposal was brave because it could hurt some feelings. But I'm just trying to support the great zine. I just speak my mind. I don't demand this to be fulfilled, I just give an idea you can take or leave and that it's totally OK.

We are all a bunch of gaming friends here!!

[sham]

I too would prefer all or almost all OD&D related material, or at the very least, all old school TSR material.

Will other material make me not interested in Fight On!? Nope. As a matter of fact I just ordered Issue #1. I'm looking forward to it's arrival like a kid waits on Santa. Cookies and milk are ready and waiting.

Cal mentioned that Issue #2 was going to be bigger, so here's hoping that OD&D maintains it's normal allotment of space (30+ pages?) within the 'zine, and the other game material doesn't take away from that.

[jrients]

Apr 24, 2008 15:35:08 GMT -6 Zulgyan said:

Yes, we just want the mag to rock and just offer our opinion if it can be of any help. My proposal was brave because it could hurt some feelings. But I'm just trying to support the great zine. I just speak my mind. I don't demand this to be fulfilled, I just give an idea you can take or leave and that it's totally OK.

We are all a bunch of gaming friends here!!

I totally agree that we're among friends here. I disagree with you on this particular topic but I totally respect your opinion. I prefer my own take, of course, but if the editorial direction went your way I'd still be on board.

For what it's worth, if I submit anything for some of the other games under consideration I will try to stick to stuff with a broader appeal that might be of benefit to an OD&D ref.

[jdrakeh]

I think the danger that must be avoided when excluding content (on these forums or in a zine) is using 'superiority' as a justification for such exclusion. To cite 'superiority' of any system as the primary justification for excluding content or discussion from/of other systems opens the door to claims of 'system bigotry' And, honestly. . .

If you're citing superiority of X system as a reason to exclude the discussion of other systems. . . well. . . those claims aren't without merit. The reason that I visit this site is specifically because people talk about OD&D here without needing to put down other games or systems in the process (which has become something of the norm at other 'old school' gaming sites).

I can recall asking for advice on how to port the Risk Rolls and downtime system from The Fantasy Trip into D&D at another old school D&D forum. No less than a dozen posters (a handful of them being site staffers) accused me of trying to pollute their discussion forum and the superiority of D&D because I mentioned another system by name and sought to incorporate part of it into D&D.

I swear to God.

If this forum ever becomes that kind of bitter, paranoid, place of fear I will not post here anymore. Likewise, if Fight On becomes a 'zine dedicated to overt hostility that promotes OD&D at the direct expense of all other games and the people who play them, I won't download it. Now, all of that having been said. . .

I have no issue with a 'zine that focuses primarily (or even exclusively) on OD&D. We should just write that 'zine. When we start taking pains to rationalize that decision or justify it to others, we're treading a slippery slope toward the cesspool that several old school gaming forums and fanzines are already rotting in. And that is what we need to avoid, IMHO.

So, to summarize, whether Fight On is exclusively OD&D or primarily OD&D, let's stop short of trying to push personal POV with regard to the system on others as though it were gospel and, instead, just write a 'zine. Or, as Calithena wisely stated "Let's focus on writing good old-school content, the rest will take care of itself."

[Zulgyan]

It has nothing to do with superiority. Nothing at all. You got it totally wrong.

It's about being special as a zine, being unique in the RPG World as a zine. To give a clear message what we are all about.

I think the mag will do better as specialized zine, rather than a general one. Because in this way it will distinguish from the rest, and have nothing to compete against. I thinks it is better not be "just like so many out there".

And you can spend you money and post wherever you want, it's OK with me.

[badger2305]

For what it's worth, I recall that one aspect of old school play (yes, "back in the day") was that we happily cobbled together things from various systems - Sturmgeschutz and Sorcery was thought of as a starting off point, not the extreme.

System exclusivity came later, and rather unhappily. Seems to me if we concentrate on (a) having a good time, and (b) working on that old school feel, we should be able to have a rockin' time with all of this. Those polls on what's "old school" are actually kinda helpful - not in a prescriptive way, but rather in an explanatory and exploratory way.

I also think we're worrying about this pretty darn early in this process. But I do think as long as we talk about it as friends, we'll be fine.

[badger2305]

Apr 24, 2008 23:16:48 GMT -6 Zulgyan said:

It has nothing to do with superiority. Nothing at all. You got it totally wrong.

It's about being special as a zine, being unique in the RPG World as a zine. To give a clear message what we are all about.

I think the mag will do better as specialized zine, rather than a general one. Because in this way it will distinguish from the rest, and have nothing to compete against. I thinks it better not be "just like so many out there".

And where you spend your $ and time for posting, I really don't care.

Zulgyan dude, relax, okay? Please - I hear you - there's something special about being THE zine focused on THE ORIGINAL game.

I thin we're going to do just fine in being a specialized 'zine as it is. It doesn't strike me that our unique flavor derives from a single game, all by itself. I think it comes from how we're exploring these old games, with the granddaddy of them all as the sun around which the others orbit.

I do care about where people post and what they spend their money on - at least the people here, like you and the others, because the conversations I've been having here with all of you (and that includes you, Zulgyan ) have been more fun than I've had in a long time talking about all of this.

So let's be gentle with one another, okay? We're doing a good job talking about this - let's keep up the level of respect and communication.

[Zulgyan]

Everything is OK ;D I was carrying everything very politely.

I just felt a bit insulted by jdrake's post. I hope it was not his intention.

I just wanna make clear I am totally away from "X game is superior" attitudes.

And also, that I'll support FO! whatever it's direction is. Just debating here.

[badger2305]

Apr 24, 2008 23:32:31 GMT -6 Zulgyan said:

Everything is OK ;D I was carrying everything very politely.

I just felt a bit insulted by jdrake's post. I hope it was not his intention.

I am very sure it was not his intention. (Yes, I'm speaking for him, but I bet I'm right ;D ).

What jdrakeh was expressing was an allergic reaction to Certain Other Forums where our favorite game gets discussed. A sort of "once burned, twice shy" feeling. He just wanted to make sure we didn't go off in that direction and NOT that you were implying that. (I think we're all better than that, though I have been a grumpy old goat in the past, and learned to get over it).

[jdrakeh]

Apr 24, 2008 23:32:31 GMT -6 Zulgyan said:

I just felt a bit insulted by jdrake's post. I hope it was not his intention.

Note that my post did not address you personally or rhetorically, rather, it merely addresed a situation that I felt it would be prudent to avoid with regard to justifying content exclusion. If you choose to take it personally, well. . . that's your choice It is was not, however, my intent.

[Zulgyan]

Excuse me them. Me bad. Sorry.

[jdrakeh]

Apr 24, 2008 23:39:15 GMT -6 badger2305 said:

What jdrakeh was expressing was an allergic reaction to Certain Other Forums where our favorite game gets discussed.

Well, it's actually more pronounced than that, as active membership at several of those other forums has dropped off significantly due to the attitude in question. In one case, a publisher actually pulled their endorsement of "official" status from such a forum due to the way that the site membership was conducting itself (ironically, the publisher forum offered in its place did not fare much better).

He just wanted to make sure we didn't go off in that direction and NOT that you were implying that.

Precisely. I did not mean to infer that anybody here was making this claim of superiority, merely that it is a claim that often gets made when people start actively looking for reasons to exclude content. My point was that we don't need reasons. If we choose to make Fight On about OD&D only, we just need to do it -- we don't need to justify it (least of all by claiming superiority over other hobbyists).

[Melan]

In any case - there should be excursions into relevant non-ODD systems and variants. I'd certainly welcome Arduin or EPT contributions, even old school Gamma World (Geoffrey's materials would be great).

[James Maliszewski]

Apr 24, 2008 23:23:55 GMT -6 badger2305 said:

I also think we're worrying about this pretty darn early in this process.

Not sure I agree with this particular point. We may have only one issue under our collective belts, but the issue has been well received and it is generating some buzz. I know of people unconnected to this forum who intend to submit articles and artwork for issues 2 and beyond. Given that, establishing rough and ready editorial guidelines for content is a good thing; I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if Fight On! proves a bigger success sooner than any of us expect.

All that said, I think Calithena's guidelines are good ones. The simple reality is that the 'zine will almost remain OD&D focused because that's what we collectively are interested in. However, many of us have interested broader than that and I'm happy to see the occasional article or two on other old school games. The Dragon regularly included articles on other games of interest and even had entire issues dedicated to other RPGs every once in a while. I see Fight On! as the spiritual successor to The Strategic Review and The Dragon and their general approach to this question seems a good one to me.

[calithena]

Guys, is posting on this thread really more useful than creating content for the magazine or your own games? Are you really deriving that much benefit in your life from it?

I'm very sad and angry about this thread. Everyone on this thread is capable of creating awesome game content. Is that less important to you than fighting over vague boundaries?

I keep wanting to say more, but I don't want this discussion to go on, so I won't. Just please consider whether it's worth your time to fight over something so insubstantial.

The boundaries of what's acceptable for this magazine under this editorial staff are and always will remain somewhat vague. That vagueness is inherent in what we're doing, for several reasons. Please don't stake out lines for others. Nobody in this thread has any authority to tell other people what or what not to write for the magazine. Do what you want, send it in, and have fun. Especially for people who understand the magazine well enough to be in on this thread, that's the only rule.

[Finarvyn]

Apr 25, 2008 7:30:22 GMT -6 calithena said:

I'm very sad and angry about this thread. Everyone on this thread is capable of creating awesome game content. Is that less important to you than fighting over vague boundaries?

I keep wanting to say more, but I don't want this discussion to go on, so I won't. Just please consider whether it's worth your time to fight over something so insubstantial.

I think I'm going to shut down the thread, simply because it's pretty premature. As I re-read the posts (including my own) I just don't like the level of potential negativity associated with Fight On! and I don't want us to tear something down before it can become great!

Calithena wants this thread to end and I agree.