More Layoffs at WotC..goes to show...
Jay A. Hafner, D.C.
(http://www.d20reviews.com/). Some familiar names appear to be hitting
the
pavement, including David Wise and Sean Connor. David Wise appears be
leaving the company entirely while it appears that Sean Connor was able
to
get a job in the DCI section of WotC.
The Steering Committee of the RPGA UK resigned en mass
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Living_Greyhawk/message/31123), to form a
new
organization called Europa. Major reasons include the elimination of
all
remaining RPGA UK staff (see Sean Connor above), and a desire to
insulate
European Gaming from any decision which might be made by the RPGA to
withdraw support for overseas gaming.
It only goes to show that if products aren't being sold, our hobby will
take a hit.
Jay H
Jeremy Reaban
"Jay A. Hafner, D.C." <jayh...@qwest.net> wrote in message
<snip>
> It only goes to show that if products aren't being sold, our hobby
will
> take a hit.
It's my understanding that it has more to do with poor sales of the
Harry Potter CCG (they expected it to duplicate the success of the
Pokemon CCG, but didn't), and that D&D is selling very well. I can't
speak for all their RPG stuff, like WoT or Star Wars. But RPG sales
are a small part of WOTC's business
Reginald Blue
news:u92a5gg...@corp.supernews.com...
If they had done Harry Potter D20, this wouldn't have happened.
;-)
chris7476
"Reginald Blue" <Regina...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:a6ra8l$713$1...@trsvr.tr.unisys.com...
I'm not sure that is such a bad idea. It would get alot more fans to RPG's
(which as has been discussed here, has its pros and cons). Good for WotC
business at least.
Mortaine
>> If they had done Harry Potter D20, this wouldn't have happened.
>>
>> ;-)
>>
>>
>
> I'm not sure that is such a bad idea. It would get alot more fans to
> RPG's
> (which as has been discussed here, has its pros and cons). Good for WotC
> business at least.
Someone ran a HP d20 game at DunDraCon (San Ramon, CA) this year. I missed
it, unfortunately, but it looked like SO MUCH FUN.
I would certainly play a d20 HP game!
--
Stephanie Bryant
st...@nospam-scottrell.com
Magical World-Builder Guide at: http://www.web-writer.net/fantasy
Tech Writer looking for job in San Jose, CA- email me if you have any leads!
Ben P.
generate increased interest in "the hobby", heh.
Perhaps though, it would help to cultivate a new wave of gamers. I know
that lots of people of all ages, backrounds etc. are
HP fans, but I tend to imagine the typical fan as being in the 9-15 (pretty
large) range. So, in summary: kids get involved in RPGs b/c
of Harry Potter; and they stay for DnD, and other games as they get older.
Does that make sense to anyone else?
"Mortaine" <st...@NOSPAMscottrell.com> wrote in message
news:joak8.7646$Jw4.2696612909@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
CSR
Reginald Blue wrote in message ...
Yeah, but that's that great market sense WotC is famous for... look at a
bunch of kids that are *reading* books ... big books with lots of pages.
Kids that dress up in costume as thier favourite character from the book,
talk like characters from the book and pretend to be characters from the
book.
An obvious RPG market? Hell no! Give them a *card* game based on the same
market strategy used to appeal to the cheap saturday morning cartoon Poke
phenom. Geez, don't you know anything about *marketing* ?
CSR
Justin Bacon
>An obvious RPG market? Hell no! Give them a *card* game based on the same
>market strategy used to appeal to the cheap saturday morning cartoon Poke
>phenom. Geez, don't you know anything about *marketing* ?
From my understanding, Rowles is opposed to the idea of a Harry Potter RPG.
Blaming WotC isn't going to get you anywhere.
JB
lizard
> An obvious RPG market? Hell no! Give them a *card* game based on the same
> market strategy used to appeal to the cheap saturday morning cartoon Poke
> phenom. Geez, don't you know anything about *marketing* ?
>
YOU might want to be aware of something called "copyright". Namely, you
can't just make a Harry Potter RPG if you want to. You need the rights.
And JK Rowling *did* *not* *sell* *the* *rights* *to* *an* *RPG*.
They COULDN'T make a Harry Potter RPG. So saying that they're stupid for
not doing so merely makes you look like an utter fool.
And before you say "Well, how am *I* supposed to know this???"...
a)If you don't know the facts, don't talk as if you do. Don't assume
they had the rights and chose not to pursue the game unless you know for
a fact that is the case.
b)There's this lovely thing called "Google". It will show you this topic
has been discussed before.
But, no, it's soooo much easier to sit back, smugly, and blather on
about how stupid other people are, because you're soooo much smarter.
So, how many copies of YOUR RPG have been sold lately? Put any of your
money where your mouth is? Think you can do a better job than WOTC? The
SRD is sitting right there. Take it, edit it, and publish it. Show us
all your great marketing skills.
kuranes
lizard wrote:
>
> YOU might want to be aware of something called "copyright". Namely, you
> can't just make a Harry Potter RPG if you want to. You need the rights.
> And JK Rowling *did* *not* *sell* *the* *rights* *to* *an* *RPG*.
Do you know if Rowling said why she doesn't want an RPG?
Cari
Jay A. Hafner, D.C.
Jay H
Justin Bacon
>From my understanding, Rowles is opposed to the idea of a Harry Potter RPG.
>Blaming WotC isn't going to get you anywhere.
Well, that's a pretty dumbass typo there.
JB
Zimri
news:20020314200154...@mb-ca.aol.com...
Yeah man! Rowling can't port her shit to the Game of S-t-n. The
fundamentalists might start banning her books!
--
Zimri
.
"Imagine a huge desert wilderness adventure culminating in the *Tomb of
Horrors* on crack - that about describes *Necropolis* [by Gary Gygax]"
-- Bill Webb of Necromancer Games
Jeremy Reaban
> There was another round of layoffs at WoTC to take effect March
14th.
> (http://www.d20reviews.com/). Some familiar names appear to be
hitting
> the
> pavement, including David Wise and Sean Connor.
I actually haven't heard of those two, but to that list add Sean
Reynolds (who used to post to this newsgroup a lot), Chris Pramas (of
Freeport/Green Ronin fame), and Ryan Dancey. Dancey left WOTC a while
ago, but had a consulting agreement with WOTC - that has apparently
been terminated....(and apparently so has his connection with Master
Tools...good thing it's in beta, I guess).
Lizard
wrote:
Two main reasons have been reported:
a)She doesn't want other people "putting words in her character's
mouths"
b)She is keeping a tight lid on plot developments, and doesn't want a
lot of world detail known to a bunch of game designers.
*----------------------------------------------------*
Evolution doesn't take prisoners:Lizard
"I've heard of this thing men call 'empathy', but I've never
once been afflicted with it, thanks the Gods." Bruno The Bandit
http://www.mrlizard.com
Mike Schneider
> It's my understanding that it has more to do with poor sales of the
> Harry Potter CCG (they expected it to duplicate the success of the
> Pokemon CCG, but didn't
God, what were they thinking?
The demographic for Harry Potter is all wrong for CCGs. It's not just a
matter of age-group; it's what *type* of kids are drawn, respectively, to
reading Harry Potter books, or watching churned-out televised dreck like
Pokemon.
I took one look at the display the day it came out, and intuitively knew
it wouldn't sell.
(Yo! Big-buck CCG houses! I'm a whore for cash! Hire me....)
--
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/American_Liberty/files/al.htm
I was planning to start a flame war, but the guy who was going to
argue pointlessly with my pointless post never posted. -- Mike Caprio
Reply to mike1@@@usfamily.net sans two @@, or your reply won't reach me.
Mike Schneider
<Regina...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> If they had done Harry Potter D20, this wouldn't have happened.
>
> ;-)
The smiley implies tongue-in-cheek, and it is ridiculous, but I'll bet you
it would have sold better than the card game.
Jeremy Reaban
"Mike Schneider" <mi...@SPAMSKILLEDusfamily.net> wrote in message
news:mike1-
<snip>
> The demographic for Harry Potter is all wrong for CCGs. It's not
just a
> matter of age-group; it's what *type* of kids are drawn,
respectively, to
> reading Harry Potter books, or watching churned-out televised dreck
like
> Pokemon.
>
> I took one look at the display the day it came out, and intuitively
knew
> it wouldn't sell.
Well, bear in mind, the fanbase of the Pokemon CCG really came from
the video games from Nintendo, not the TV show. Because the basic
nature of the CCG was very similar to that of the video games (collect
monsters of varying rarity and force them to fight against other
captive monsters), it was a unique situation.
OTOH, Harry Potter has absolutely no connection to collecting cards
(or collecting anything, really)
Steve
> I'm not exactly a Harry Potter fan, but I can clearly see that it would
> generate increased interest in "the hobby", heh.
> Perhaps though, it would help to cultivate a new wave of gamers. I know
> that lots of people of all ages, backrounds etc. are
> HP fans, but I tend to imagine the typical fan as being in the 9-15 (pretty
> large) range. So, in summary: kids get involved in RPGs b/c
> of Harry Potter; and they stay for DnD, and other games as they get older.
> Does that make sense to anyone else?
Well actually, yeah. Also the Harry Potter books are becoming
progressively darker and the tone more mature. So by the end of the
series a person who "matriculates" to either D&D or some d20 version
of HP would probably be off to a good start, IMO.
Mike Schneider
<j...@connectria.com> wrote:
> "Mike Schneider" <mi...@SPAMSKILLEDusfamily.net> wrote in message
> news:mike1-
> <snip>
> > The demographic for Harry Potter is all wrong for CCGs. It's not
> just a
> > matter of age-group; it's what *type* of kids are drawn,
> respectively, to
> > reading Harry Potter books, or watching churned-out televised dreck
> like
> > Pokemon.
> >
> > I took one look at the display the day it came out, and intuitively
> knew
> > it wouldn't sell.
>
> Well, bear in mind, the fanbase of the Pokemon CCG really came from
> the video games from Nintendo, not the TV show.
I figure at least 50x as many have seen the show as have played the
video game. In that respect, the CCG did not depend on the video.
> Because the basic
> nature of the CCG was very similar to that of the video games (collect
> monsters of varying rarity and force them to fight against other
> captive monsters), it was a unique situation.
--
John Carney
Did she actually say she didn't want an RPG, or has she simply not
sold the rights? ... yet
Cheers,
John Carney.
kuranes
Lizard wrote:
>
> >Do you know if Rowling said why she doesn't want an RPG?
> >Cari
>
> Two main reasons have been reported:
> a)She doesn't want other people "putting words in her character's
> mouths"
> b)She is keeping a tight lid on plot developments, and doesn't want a
> lot of world detail known to a bunch of game designers.
Huh. Interesting :) I wonder if she'll change her mind after all the books
are published! *crossing fingers*
Cari
kuranes
Jeremy Reaban wrote:
>
> OTOH, Harry Potter has absolutely no connection to collecting cards
> (or collecting anything, really)
If only the cards had come with chocolate frogs..
Cari
Peter Meilinger
: On Thu, 14 Mar 2002 20:18:47 -0500, kuranes <kur...@starpower.net>
: wrote:
:>> YOU might want to be aware of something called "copyright". Namely, you
:>> can't just make a Harry Potter RPG if you want to. You need the rights.
:>> And JK Rowling *did* *not* *sell* *the* *rights* *to* *an* *RPG*.
:>
:>Do you know if Rowling said why she doesn't want an RPG?
: Two main reasons have been reported:
: a)She doesn't want other people "putting words in her character's
: mouths"
Someone needs to point her to fanfiction.net. 30,588 at the moment.
Yeesh. And 1172 more "Harry Potter author fics," whatever the hell
those are.
Of course, there are also 24 fics based on the video game Pong.
And fics based on "Whose Line Is It, Anyway?" There are even
Colin/Ryan shipper fics.
I fear humanity.
: b)She is keeping a tight lid on plot developments, and doesn't want a
: lot of world detail known to a bunch of game designers.
That's a valid concern, sure. It seems like it'd be easy enough
to work around, though. Of course, if she just doesn't want a
Harry Potter RPG, that's her decision. And it certainly doesn't
stop anyone from gaming at Hogwart's.
Pete
Sea Wasp
>
> "Reginald Blue" <Regina...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:a6ra8l$713$1...@trsvr.tr.unisys.com..
> > news:u92a5gg...@corp.supernews.com..
> > >
> > > <snip>
> > > > It only goes to show that if products aren't being sold, our hobby
> > > will
> > > > take a hit.
> > >
> > > It's my understanding that it has more to do with poor sales of the
> > > Harry Potter CCG (they expected it to duplicate the success of the
> > > Pokemon CCG, but didn't), and that D&D is selling very well. I can't
> > > speak for all their RPG stuff, like WoT or Star Wars. But RPG sales
> > > are a small part of WOTC's business
> >
> > If they had done Harry Potter D20, this wouldn't have happened.
> >
> > ;-)
> >
> >
>
> I'm not sure that is such a bad idea. It would get alot more fans to RPG's
> (which as has been discussed here, has its pros and cons). Good for WotC
> business at least.
Unfortunately, Rowling doesn't WANT there to be an RPG. She can't
really stop people from writing fanfic, or playing HP campaigns at
home, but she can keep anyone from having official approval to do so.
She has said that she doesn't want other people putting words in the
mouths of her characters. While in normal circumstances this would
seem a bit silly, apparently the series is in part her own approach to
dealing with some of her own issues; if she finds the series itself
deeply personal, it would make sense that she would not want to see
other people treating it as a game.
--
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
http://www.wizvax.net/seawasp/index.htm
Sea Wasp
>
> "Jeremy Reaban" <j...@connectria.com> wrote:
>
> > It's my understanding that it has more to do with poor sales of the
> > Harry Potter CCG (they expected it to duplicate the success of the
> > Pokemon CCG, but didn't
>
> God, what were they thinking?
>
> The demographic for Harry Potter is all wrong for CCGs. It's not just a
> matter of age-group; it's what *type* of kids are drawn, respectively, to
> reading Harry Potter books, or watching churned-out televised dreck like
> Pokemon.
>
> I took one look at the display the day it came out, and intuitively knew
> it wouldn't sell.
Tell that to my son, who owns a bunch of cards and constantly bothers
me to play it again and again. And wants more cards.
And he's 5.
Rusty Haskell
> There was another round of layoffs at WoTC to take effect March 14th.
For what it's worth, Sean Reynolds was in the group of folks who got
the axe.
http://www.seankreynolds.com/masterplan.html
I really like the wild magic rules that he posted on his site, and
it's a bummer that he won't be contributing to Wizards products
anymore.
--
Rusty Haskell <fuz...@bactroid.net>
Rogue Programmer, Code Ninja, Hardware Necromancer
http://www.bactroid.net
lizard
> Lizard <liz...@mrlizard.com> wrote:
> : On Thu, 14 Mar 2002 20:18:47 -0500, kuranes <kur...@starpower.net>
> : wrote:
>
> :>> YOU might want to be aware of something called "copyright". Namely, you
> :>> can't just make a Harry Potter RPG if you want to. You need the rights.
> :>> And JK Rowling *did* *not* *sell* *the* *rights* *to* *an* *RPG*.
> :>
> :>Do you know if Rowling said why she doesn't want an RPG?
>
> : Two main reasons have been reported:
> : a)She doesn't want other people "putting words in her character's
> : mouths"
>
> Someone needs to point her to fanfiction.net. 30,588 at the moment.
> Yeesh. And 1172 more "Harry Potter author fics," whatever the hell
> those are.
>
Of course. But those are unauthorized. She knows she can't really stop
them, just annoy fans. But a commercial RPG must be authorized, must be
given the canonical blessing of the author.
Technically, I suppose, someone running a Harry Potter game using FUDGE
or D20 or GURPS or what-have-you at a con (where you pay for admission)
might be treading a thin line, but, by the time anyone with legal clout
finds out about it, the con is over.
Hm.
Any homebrew HP RPGs on the *official* schedule of events at GenCon?
> Of course, there are also 24 fics based on the video game Pong.
>
> And fics based on "Whose Line Is It, Anyway?" There are even
> Colin/Ryan shipper fics.
>
> I fear humanity.
La la la... http://www.lexicon.tf/user.php?op=userinfo&uname=Lizard la
la la... ("To Walk Among Them" is probably the best...avoid "Sale of the
24th century" it was my first venture into fiction writing and it shows.)
> : b)She is keeping a tight lid on plot developments, and doesn't want a
> : lot of world detail known to a bunch of game designers.
>
> That's a valid concern, sure. It seems like it'd be easy enough
> to work around, though. Of course, if she just doesn't want a
> Harry Potter RPG, that's her decision. And it certainly doesn't
> stop anyone from gaming at Hogwart's.
>
I can think of other reasons -- her time is stressed already with
keeping an eye on the film, she has very high expectations to meet for
the next novel, etc.
The ultimate upshot, though, is this: WOTC *wanted* to do an HP RPG. For
a while, they even thought they did have the rights -- checking around,
you can find some old press releases to that effect. They aren't stupid
idiots who can't see a cash cow when it lands on their doorstep. But,
ultimately, they didn't have the rights, and that's that.
Jay A. Hafner, D.C.
Jay H
Mike Schneider
Q. Did you buy if for him on your own initiative because you play CCGs and
want to introduce them to your son, of did your 5 year-old *ask* you do
buy him Harry Potter cards?
That's the crucial difference: Harry Potter is, for the most part, a
cerebral enterprise which parents (who've heard good things about the
books) introduce to their kids (who then read the rest of them). Pokemon,
in contrast, is a lowest common denominator mass phenomenom. The HP CCG
may be a fine game, but it can only work off its installed base of "Harry
Potter gamers", which are relatively limited compared to Pokemon. If
Potter had been made into a rapidly churned-out cartoon, there would have
been hope for a CCG (but I still wouldn't have bet on it).
Sea Wasp
>
> Peter Meilinger wrote:
>
> > Lizard <liz...@mrlizard.com> wrote:
> > : On Thu, 14 Mar 2002 20:18:47 -0500, kuranes <kur...@starpower.net>
> > : wrote:
> >
> > :>> YOU might want to be aware of something called "copyright". Namely, you
> > :>> can't just make a Harry Potter RPG if you want to. You need the rights.
> > :>> And JK Rowling *did* *not* *sell* *the* *rights* *to* *an* *RPG*.
> > :>
> > :>Do you know if Rowling said why she doesn't want an RPG?
> >
> > : Two main reasons have been reported:
> > : a)She doesn't want other people "putting words in her character's
> > : mouths"
> >
> > Someone needs to point her to fanfiction.net. 30,588 at the moment.
> > Yeesh. And 1172 more "Harry Potter author fics," whatever the hell
> > those are.
> >
>
> Of course. But those are unauthorized. She knows she can't really stop
> them, just annoy fans. But a commercial RPG must be authorized, must be
> given the canonical blessing of the author.
>
> Technically, I suppose, someone running a Harry Potter game using FUDGE
> or D20 or GURPS or what-have-you at a con (where you pay for admission)
> might be treading a thin line, but, by the time anyone with legal clout
> finds out about it, the con is over.
For lawyers, it ain't over until they SAY it's over. If they felt it
was something necessary to make an issue over, they'd do it even after
the con, in order to make their trademark point.
>
> Hm.
>
> Any homebrew HP RPGs on the *official* schedule of events at GenCon?
>
> > Of course, there are also 24 fics based on the video game Pong.
> >
> > And fics based on "Whose Line Is It, Anyway?" There are even
> > Colin/Ryan shipper fics.
> >
> > I fear humanity.
>
> La la la... http://www.lexicon.tf/user.php?op=userinfo&uname=Lizard la
> la la... ("To Walk Among Them" is probably the best...avoid "Sale of the
> 24th century" it was my first venture into fiction writing and it shows.)
And my wife and I are well known in the anime fanfic area (Saint
Seiya, Gundam, Dragonball). And if the basic concept of An American
Gamer in Gondor isn't pretty much 4-star loser material...
Sea Wasp
>
> In article <3C9221...@wizvax.net>, sea...@wizvax.net wrote:
>
> > Mike Schneider wrote:
> > >
> > > "Jeremy Reaban" <j...@connectria.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > It's my understanding that it has more to do with poor sales of the
> > > > Harry Potter CCG (they expected it to duplicate the success of the
> > > > Pokemon CCG, but didn't
> > >
> > > God, what were they thinking?
> > >
> > > The demographic for Harry Potter is all wrong for CCGs. It's not just a
> > > matter of age-group; it's what *type* of kids are drawn, respectively, to
> > > reading Harry Potter books, or watching churned-out televised dreck like
> > > Pokemon.
> > >
> > > I took one look at the display the day it came out, and intuitively knew
> > > it wouldn't sell.
> >
> > Tell that to my son, who owns a bunch of cards and constantly bothers
> > me to play it again and again. And wants more cards.
> >
> > And he's 5.
>
> Q. Did you buy if for him on your own initiative because you play CCGs and
> want to introduce them to your son, of did your 5 year-old *ask* you do
> buy him Harry Potter cards?
The latter. He wanted Harry Potter stuff. I got him the card game as
a stocking stuffer. At first he didn't want to play, until he realized
that someone would HELP him (he assumed he'd have to do it all
himself, which considering that he's just started reading would be an
exceedingly daunting task), at which point he started playing, asked
for more cards, and now wants me to get him still MORE cards
(especially, of course, a Harry card, because he wants to use Harry as
his starting character).
Peter Meilinger
: Peter Meilinger wrote:
:> : a)She doesn't want other people "putting words in her character's
:> : mouths"
:>
:> Someone needs to point her to fanfiction.net. 30,588 at the moment.
:> Yeesh. And 1172 more "Harry Potter author fics," whatever the hell
:> those are.
: Of course. But those are unauthorized. She knows she can't really stop
: them, just annoy fans. But a commercial RPG must be authorized, must be
: given the canonical blessing of the author.
Right. I just wanted to quote a huge number, really.
: Technically, I suppose, someone running a Harry Potter game using FUDGE
: or D20 or GURPS or what-have-you at a con (where you pay for admission)
: might be treading a thin line, but, by the time anyone with legal clout
: finds out about it, the con is over.
: Hm.
: Any homebrew HP RPGs on the *official* schedule of events at GenCon?
That'd be interesting.
:> Of course, there are also 24 fics based on the video game Pong.
:>
:> And fics based on "Whose Line Is It, Anyway?" There are even
:> Colin/Ryan shipper fics.
:>
:> I fear humanity.
: La la la... http://www.lexicon.tf/user.php?op=userinfo&uname=Lizard la
: la la... ("To Walk Among Them" is probably the best...avoid "Sale of the
: 24th century" it was my first venture into fiction writing and it shows.)
Oh, I have nothing at all against fanfic in general. I write Buffy
fic, actually - http://www.unfitforsociety.net/pete/fiction.html
I was referring specifically to Pong fic and Whose Line Is It
Anyway? actorfic. Real person fic always bothers me, but Colin/
Ryan is just wrong.
:> : b)She is keeping a tight lid on plot developments, and doesn't want a
:> : lot of world detail known to a bunch of game designers.
:>
:> That's a valid concern, sure. It seems like it'd be easy enough
:> to work around, though. Of course, if she just doesn't want a
:> Harry Potter RPG, that's her decision. And it certainly doesn't
:> stop anyone from gaming at Hogwart's.
: I can think of other reasons -- her time is stressed already with
: keeping an eye on the film, she has very high expectations to meet for
: the next novel, etc.
Sure. Plus, WOTC might not be able to give her enough money to
justify how much work she'd have to put in to make sure the
game is up to her standards.
: The ultimate upshot, though, is this: WOTC *wanted* to do an HP RPG. For
: a while, they even thought they did have the rights -- checking around,
: you can find some old press releases to that effect. They aren't stupid
: idiots who can't see a cash cow when it lands on their doorstep. But,
: ultimately, they didn't have the rights, and that's that.
Yep. Shame, that.
Pete
Stephen Adams
>"Justin Bacon" <tria...@aol.com> wrote in message
>news:20020314200154...@mb-ca.aol.com...
>> CSR wrote:
>> >An obvious RPG market? Hell no! Give them a *card* game based on the
>same
>> >market strategy used to appeal to the cheap saturday morning cartoon Poke
>> >phenom. Geez, don't you know anything about *marketing* ?
>>
>> From my understanding, Rowles is opposed to the idea of a Harry Potter
>RPG.
>> Blaming WotC isn't going to get you anywhere.
>
>Yeah man! Rowling can't port her shit to the Game of S-t-n. The
>fundamentalists might start banning her books!
Several "Christian" schools around here put HP on the "banned in
our school" list...since it deals with witchcraft, etc. I wonder
if they've read their Bibles??? (see 1 Sam 28).
-Stephen
--
The opinions expressed above are those of the author
---Bin Laden - we're coming. Say your prayers---
sad...@enteract.com "Space-age cybernomad" Stephen Adams
CSR
lizard wrote in message <3C91426...@mrlizard.com>...
>CSR wrote:
>
>
>> An obvious RPG market? Hell no! Give them a *card* game based on the
same
>> market strategy used to appeal to the cheap saturday morning cartoon Poke
>> phenom. Geez, don't you know anything about *marketing* ?
>>
>
>can't just make a Harry Potter RPG if you want to. You need the rights.
>And JK Rowling *did* *not* *sell* *the* *rights* *to* *an* *RPG*.
>
>not doing so merely makes you look like an utter fool.
>
>And before you say "Well, how am *I* supposed to know this???"...
>
>a)If you don't know the facts, don't talk as if you do. Don't assume
>they had the rights and chose not to pursue the game unless you know for
>a fact that is the case.
>
>b)There's this lovely thing called "Google". It will show you this topic
>has been discussed before.
Yeah yeah fanboy. All noted, and I'm sure you are earning many many WotC
brownie points. I'd tell you what I know and don't know ...but since you
seem to be so happy to tell me what you *think* I know, I'll let you spout.
The point is this: Potter is ideally suited for an RPG. WotC was in the
middle of a big RPG push with the release of 3e. *get* the RPG rights for
it. Work for em.
You don't go "oh well, I guess all we can do is get TCG rights so we'll
expend money on a product that doesn't fit the market. That makes as much
sense as selling snow boots in hawaii because all the swimsuits rights were
taken.
WotC made a boo boo. Lots of companies do. The smart ones, if they survive,
learn from it. Of course, to do that means admitting an error, which you
would rather they not do.
CSR
CSR
Justin Bacon wrote in message
<20020314200154...@mb-ca.aol.com>...
>CSR wrote:
>>An obvious RPG market? Hell no! Give them a *card* game based on the
same
>>market strategy used to appeal to the cheap saturday morning cartoon Poke
>>phenom. Geez, don't you know anything about *marketing* ?
>
>Blaming WotC isn't going to get you anywhere.
>
My point was basically that the resources devoted to securing the card lisc.
and developing the card game would have been better directed towards
convincing Rowles otherwise. Barring that, they would have been better
directed towards other endeavours entirely.
Harry Potter has elements of a fad to it, and it's high profile popularity
risks evaporating as quickly as the pokemon phenom. While many kids that
started with a harry potter RPG would stay with the hobby and form a future
market base for non harry products, a card game, even if it *were* suited to
the potter market, is likely to maintain popularity only as long as Harry
Potter is *the* thing and is liable to fade as the franchise does.
CSR
CSR
Stephen Adams wrote in message ...
>"Zimri" <zim...@SBCspammlesforglobal.net> writes:
>
>>"Justin Bacon" <tria...@aol.com> wrote in message
>>news:20020314200154...@mb-ca.aol.com...
>>> CSR wrote:
>>> >An obvious RPG market? Hell no! Give them a *card* game based on the
>>same
>>> >market strategy used to appeal to the cheap saturday morning cartoon
Poke
>>> >phenom. Geez, don't you know anything about *marketing* ?
>>>
>>> From my understanding, Rowles is opposed to the idea of a Harry Potter
>>RPG.
>>> Blaming WotC isn't going to get you anywhere.
>>
>>Yeah man! Rowling can't port her shit to the Game of S-t-n. The
>>fundamentalists might start banning her books!
>
>Several "Christian" schools around here put HP on the "banned in
>our school" list...since it deals with witchcraft, etc. I wonder
>if they've read their Bibles??? (see 1 Sam 28).
>
Several "christian" sects seem to ban *anything* that is popular. Should
they ever succeed in evangelizing everyone to their peculiar subset of Faith
one wonders how they would react to Christianity being "pop culture"
Actually, seeing as how many of these same groups have banned "christian
rock music" I think I know the answer ;-)
CSR
CSR
Mike Schneider wrote in message ...
>In article <a6ra8l$713$1...@trsvr.tr.unisys.com>, "Reginald Blue"
><Regina...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>> If they had done Harry Potter D20, this wouldn't have happened.
>>
>> ;-)
>
>
>The smiley implies tongue-in-cheek, and it is ridiculous, but I'll bet you
>it would have sold better than the card game.
>
And just as importantly, when the kids grew up, and Harry Potter fades from
view and goes back to the back burner or becomes a "children's classic"
those players would move onto other non Harry RPG formats, increasing the
overall market. A large percentage of RPGer's once bitten are in it for
life.
If the same were true of card games, one would think all those poke players
would now be into MTG and WotC would still be rolling in cash.
CSR
CSR
Sea Wasp wrote in message <3C9221...@wizvax.net>...
Another factor is that we don't know how well she understands the concept
and reality of RPG's.
She is very picky about the image of Harry, as evidenced by the amount of
detail and control she exercized over the making of the movie. If she is
influenced by the bad press that the general public has of RPG's and players
( at best we are social misfits at worst satanic nutcases ) she isn't going
to want Harry 'tainted' by that. And if she doesn't realize that what an
RPG would do would be to allow kids to make and play out thier own stories
about *harry like* characters in her setting, she might not quite understand
that people are not going to be taking control of her characters. *shrug*
CSR
Bokman7757
>Potter is ideally suited for an RPG. WotC was in the
>middle of a big RPG push with the release of 3e. *get* the RPG rights
>for
>it. Work for em.
How do you propose that? Send a couple of enforcers over to J. K. Rowling's
house?
The woman has more money than she'll ever be able to spend. I doubt WotC would
be able to offer enough to change her mind.
Sea Wasp
>
> lizard wrote in message <3C91426...@mrlizard.com>...
> >CSR wrote:
> >
> >
> >> An obvious RPG market? Hell no! Give them a *card* game based on the
> same
> >> market strategy used to appeal to the cheap saturday morning cartoon Poke
> >> phenom. Geez, don't you know anything about *marketing* ?
> >>
> >
> >YOU might want to be aware of something called "copyright". Namely, you
> >can't just make a Harry Potter RPG if you want to. You need the rights.
> >And JK Rowling *did* *not* *sell* *the* *rights* *to* *an* *RPG*.
> >
> >They COULDN'T make a Harry Potter RPG. So saying that they're stupid for
> >not doing so merely makes you look like an utter fool.
> >
> >And before you say "Well, how am *I* supposed to know this???"...
> >
> >a)If you don't know the facts, don't talk as if you do. Don't assume
> >they had the rights and chose not to pursue the game unless you know for
> >a fact that is the case.
> >
> >b)There's this lovely thing called "Google". It will show you this topic
> >has been discussed before.
>
> Yeah yeah fanboy. All noted, and I'm sure you are earning many many WotC
> brownie points. I'd tell you what I know and don't know ...but since you
> seem to be so happy to tell me what you *think* I know, I'll let you spout.
>
> The point is this: Potter is ideally suited for an RPG. WotC was in the
> middle of a big RPG push with the release of 3e. *get* the RPG rights for
> it. Work for em.
Um, try reading the thread; Rowling REFUSED to sell those rights.
Multiple times. This has been stated more than once.
She did not, and does not, want "other people putting words in my
characters' mouths". In addition, she doesn't want to reveal anything
of forthcoming books.
She is currently the most powerful author on earth, and one of the
richest. No gaming company could possibly offer her anything to change
her mind.
Sea Wasp
>
> Sea Wasp wrote in message <3C9221...@wizvax.net>...
> >chris7476 wrote:
> >>
> >> "Reginald Blue" <Regina...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >> news:a6ra8l$713$1...@trsvr.tr.unisys.com.
> >> > news:u92a5gg...@corp.supernews.com.
> >> > >
The hell they're not. Even if people don't play Harry directly, any
Harry Potter RPG would include stats on Hogwarts, Dumbledore, Hagrid,
and probably Harry, Malfoy, Hermione, and Ron. They'd be notable NPCs
in many people's games. Take a look at ANY of the book-or-media
adaptation RPGs. They ALL contain versions of the major characters.
Her objection is a deeply personal one, and I doubt any form of
argument will change her mind, at least not until she's FINISHED the
series and gone through whatever catharsis she hopes it will provide.
Hal
wrote:
[Rowling unwilling to sell Harry Potter RPG rights]
>The woman has more money than she'll ever be able to spend. I doubt WotC would
>be able to offer enough to change her mind.
Then again, it's possible that she is quite greedy - just
take a look at the fantababulous amount of HP-based JUNK on
offer.
Either that or there's no quality control at all.
(To be fair, there's quality stuff as well, like the CCG*
and Lego, for instance.)
In either case, there ought to be hope for an RPG.
Maybe once she's finished the series.
Regards,
Hal
--
*I'm not arguing that CCGs are inherently 'quality stuff'.
But this one is from the market leader and features nice
production values and a solid design. The plastic toys
produced in Asia are another matter. Many of them are
complete drek.
Enderian
> I'm not exactly a Harry Potter fan, but I can clearly see that it would
> generate increased interest in "the hobby", heh.
> Perhaps though, it would help to cultivate a new wave of gamers. I know
> that lots of people of all ages, backrounds etc. are
> HP fans, but I tend to imagine the typical fan as being in the 9-15 (pretty
> large) range. So, in summary: kids get involved in RPGs b/c
> of Harry Potter; and they stay for DnD, and other games as they get older.
> Does that make sense to anyone else?
Makes perfect sense to me. My 7-year-old is totally into Harry, and
every time a new creature pops up he goes to my MM to see what the thing
looks like. The third book has a griffon, but the books calls it a
hippogrif ... so my 7-year-old thinks that D&D is full of ^&*(%*, 'cause
Harry can do no wrong. :)
Enderian.
--
My little world - Orbis:
http://members.fortunecity.com/enderian
-----
Candy for spamers:
http://members.fortunecity.com/enderian/spamthis.shtml
Enderian
>
> "Jay A. Hafner, D.C." <jayh...@qwest.net> wrote in message
> <snip>
> > It only goes to show that if products aren't being sold, our hobby
> will
> > take a hit.
>
> It's my understanding that it has more to do with poor sales of the
> Harry Potter CCG (they expected it to duplicate the success of the
> Pokemon CCG, but didn't), and that D&D is selling very well. I can't
> speak for all their RPG stuff, like WoT or Star Wars. But RPG sales
> are a small part of WOTC's business
Am I wrong when I thought the whole CCG concept was just a fad? I
thought M:TG was loads of fun, for like 2 seasons.
Hong Ooi
>
>Several "Christian" schools around here put HP on the "banned in
>our school" list...since it deals with witchcraft, etc. I wonder
>if they've read their Bibles??? (see 1 Sam 28).
I don't get it. What's Hewlett-Packard done wrong that's put it offside
with Christians? Is it something to do with taking over Compaq?
I mean, it's not like they're denying that Pi=3 or something.
--
Hong Ooi | "Not that you can verify it, but
hong...@maths.anu.edu.au | I have a doctorate in poli-sci."
http://www.zipworld.com.au/~hong/dnd/ | -- SKG
Canberra, Australia |
Clangador
>thought M:TG was loads of fun, for like 2 seasons.
>
There are still CCG, but they have faded in popularity quite a bit. WotC is
still cranking out M:TG stuff. I couple guys in my gaming group still play it,
but all the rest of us sold off our cards years ago.
~Clangador
==========================
"Fantasy is like alcohol - too much is bad for you, a little bit makes the
world a better place."
-Terry Prachett, "The Discworld Companion"
Justin Bacon
>The point is this: Potter is ideally suited for an RPG. WotC was in the
>middle of a big RPG push with the release of 3e. *get* the RPG rights for
>it. Work for em.
What are you suggesting here, exactly? That Wizards should have contracted
assassins to kill J.K. Rowling, hoping that her heirs would be more willing to
sell the RPG rights to Harry Potter?
You've been told the facts. You have chosen to ignore them. Anyone who
willfully chooses to live in ignorane is a moron. Therefore, you are a moron.
Justin Bacon
tria...@aol.com
john v verkuilen
[snip]
>of Harry Potter; and they stay for DnD, and other games as they get older.
>Does that make sense to anyone else?
Tons, absolutely tons. It might be exceptionally hard to bring off, though.
More big time licenses flop than you might think.
Jay
--
J. Verkuilen ja...@uiuc.edu
"Depend upon it, sir, when a man knows he is to be hanged in a fortnight, it
concentrates his mind wonderfully." --Dr. Samuel Johnson
Dissertation pages written: 110 + rewrites; RIP Stuart Adamson, 1958-2001.
CSR
Bokman7757 wrote in message <20020316065038...@mb-md.aol.com>...
>>From: "CSR" now...@nohow.com
>
>>Potter is ideally suited for an RPG. WotC was in the
>>middle of a big RPG push with the release of 3e. *get* the RPG rights
>>for
>>it. Work for em.
>
>How do you propose that? Send a couple of enforcers over to J. K. Rowling's
>house?
>
Actually, making an apointment and sending the head of the company and a
couple of players over to have a heart to heart about why a Harry Potter RPG
would be a *good thing* for kids, without talking about how much money it
could make for them or her probably wouldn't hurt. At worst, you don't get
the rights, which is where you started.
>The woman has more money than she'll ever be able to spend. I doubt WotC
would
>be able to offer enough to change her mind.
Never said buying someone with chas was the way to go... that would assume
that money was her only motivation, which would be absurd. If it were, she
*would* have sold the rights.
CSR
CSR
Sea Wasp wrote in message <3C933E...@wizvax.net>...
Why is it that you folks think only in terms of money? *Obviously* money
isn't her only motivation or she *would* have sold the rights. But does she
actually *know* what and RPG is? What it would involve? And how it could be
done without other people writing Harry et al? Has anyone actually sat
down with her and told her that a Potter RPG couls be a good thing for the
kids, not just a way to make money off the name?
You try that, with sincerity, and at worse you don't get the rights.
Which brings up point two: Just because you can't get the RPG rights
doesn't mean that a card game is a good idea. Sometimes 2nd choice is
almost as good as the first choice. Sometimes it's not worth bothering with
at all.
I wonder what Rowlings reaction would have been if WOtc had returned the
card game rights saying that if we can't treat the subject properly, with
the sort of game it deserves, we would rather not mess around with your
creation. Instead, they settled for trying to cash in on the "harry mania"
It might be profitable, even more so than the same amount of money invested
in other projects. But even if a tactical success, strategically it doesn't
sing. *shrug*
CSR
Sea Wasp
> > She did not, and does not, want "other people putting words in my
> >characters' mouths". In addition, she doesn't want to reveal anything
> >of forthcoming books.
> >
> > She is currently the most powerful author on earth, and one of the
> >richest. No gaming company could possibly offer her anything to change
> >her mind.
>
> Why is it that you folks think only in terms of money?
We don't. Nor does Rowling.
*Obviously* money
> isn't her only motivation or she *would* have sold the rights. But does she
> actually *know* what and RPG is?
I believe so.
What it would involve? And how it could be
> done without other people writing Harry et al?
It couldn't, unless it was done completely differently from EVERY
other adaptation of media-to-RPG I've ever seen. ALL of them include
stats for the major characters of the setting -- Babylon 5, Star Trek,
Star Wars, Dragonball Z, etc., etc. -- it is, in fact, _de rigeur_ and
thus expected. A "Harry Potter" game that didn't even include stats
for Harry, Dumbledore, Snape, Ron, Hagrid, Hermione, and of course
Voldemort Himself would probably invoke unending flames on Abusenet
and elsewhere.
Has anyone actually sat
> down with her and told her that a Potter RPG couls be a good thing for the
> kids, not just a way to make money off the name?
Probably. It's irrelevant, because -- AS STATED PREVIOUSLY -- her
objections are PERSONAL, and have nothing to do with whether or not
the kids would get something out of it or be sent straight to hell by
the game.
>
> You try that, with sincerity, and at worse you don't get the rights.
>
> Which brings up point two: Just because you can't get the RPG rights
> doesn't mean that a card game is a good idea. Sometimes 2nd choice is
> almost as good as the first choice. Sometimes it's not worth bothering with
> at all.
In this case, it WAS worth bothering with.
They made money on it.
Just not NEARLY as much as Hasbro was hoping.
This isn't all that surprising; one of the things that they wanted
WotC for was Peter&Co's "midas touch" -- the fact that he seemed to be
finding the right things to promote.
They then changed how he was allowed to run the company, and how the
company did business... and he and others are now gone. So maybe, if
there ever WAS a "midas touch", Midas has now left the building.
Kevin Sours
> Probably. It's irrelevant, because -- AS STATED PREVIOUSLY -- her
> objections are PERSONAL, and have nothing to do with whether or not
> the kids would get something out of it or be sent straight to hell by
> the game.
I've seen a number of statements as to Rowlings reasons for not
wanting a Harry Potter RPG, but there don't seem to be any direct
statements from her or her representatives. Do you know of any
sources to back this up?
Kevin
Hong Ooi
>
> Actually, making an apointment and sending the head of the company and a
> couple of players over to have a heart to heart about why a Harry Potter RPG
> would be a *good thing* for kids, without talking about how much money it
> could make for them or her probably wouldn't hurt. At worst, you don't get
> the rights, which is where you started.
D00d, your obsession with st4l><0ring J.K. Rowling is getting scary.
Robert Baldwin
<hong...@maths.anu.edu.au> wrote:
<snip>
>I don't get it. What's Hewlett-Packard done wrong that's put it offside
>with Christians? Is it something to do with taking over Compaq?
>
>I mean, it's not like they're denying that Pi=3 or something.
Right. That was Intel. Early Pentium chips were flawed, and couldn't
handle Pi=3. It was in all the trade news at the time.
--
Saint Baldwin, Definer of the Unholy Darkspawn
-
"So here we are going into battle, butt freaking naked.
What's wrong with this picture?"
Nene Romanova
-
"Everyone dies someday; the trick is doing it well." [St. B]
-
Remove the spam-block to reply
Ex Mudder
> Mike Schneider wrote in message ...
> >In article <a6ra8l$713$1...@trsvr.tr.unisys.com>, "Reginald Blue"
> ><Regina...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> If they had done Harry Potter D20, this wouldn't have happened.
> >>
> >> ;-)
> >
> >The smiley implies tongue-in-cheek, and it is ridiculous, but I'll bet you
> >it would have sold better than the card game.
>
> And just as importantly, when the kids grew up, and Harry Potter fades from
> view and goes back to the back burner or becomes a "children's classic"
Back Burner?
Harry Potter is the new "Narnia"
I think it will stick around for quite some time.
Robert Baldwin
<SNIP>
> It couldn't, unless it was done completely differently from EVERY
>other adaptation of media-to-RPG I've ever seen. ALL of them include
>stats for the major characters of the setting -- Babylon 5, Star Trek,
>Star Wars, Dragonball Z, etc., etc. -- it is, in fact, _de rigeur_ and
>thus expected. A "Harry Potter" game that didn't even include stats
>for Harry, Dumbledore, Snape, Ron, Hagrid, Hermione, and of course
>Voldemort Himself would probably invoke unending flames on Abusenet
>and elsewhere.
Moreover, Rowling (or the relevant attorneys) would be forced to run
around and play lawyer-thug WRT all the fan-sites which *would* have
those stats. Gee, I just know how much sympathy she'd get around here
at *that* point.
Justin Bacon
>Actually, making an apointment and sending the head of the company and a
>couple of players over to have a heart to heart about why a Harry Potter RPG
>would be a *good thing* for kids, without talking about how much money it
>could make for them or her probably wouldn't hurt. At worst, you don't get
>the rights, which is where you started.
And you know they didn't do this... how, exactly?
Justin Bacon
tria...@aol.com
ElfBard
> If they had done Harry Potter D20, this wouldn't have happened.
ack! PH34R!
ElfBard
> How do you propose that? Send a couple of enforcers over to J. K.
Rowling's
> house?
Ooooh enforcers.... I like that idea! MUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAA!
ElfBard
> D00d, your obsession with st4l><0ring J.K. Rowling is getting scary.
>
What about st4><0ring? She's probably one of Miho's vampire minons anyway ;P
BlakGard
>>fades from view and goes back to the back burner or becomes a
>>"children's classic"
>
>Back Burner?
>Harry Potter is the new "Narnia"
>I think it will stick around for quite some time.
Narnia was never *that* big. I've already noticed the Harry Potter fad waning.
Many are saying the latest book just doesn't seem to have the same hooks that
it's predecessors did.
-=[ The BlakGard ]=-
"Somewhere there's danger;
somewhere there's injustice,
and somewhere else the tea is getting cold!"
JM Heard
next movie (a year? two?) and somehow find the money to slip in a mention of
the game with the other promotionals I suspect it would do nothing but good
business. Ugh, even though I can just shudder on the basic prinicples, getting
some fast food restaurant to make those silly little placemats have d20 HP
stats as a little reference would probably kick the whole thing in the panties
real good. The best thing about the whole d20 thing is that HP could do the
"selling out" for the hobby and still benefit D&D.
Muhahahahaha.
JMH
|+| Since light travels faster than sound, |+|
|+| some people seem interesting |+|
|+| until you hear them speak. |+|
JM Heard
>house?
>
>The woman has more money than she'll ever be able to spend. I doubt WotC
>would
>be able to offer enough to change her mind.
That's not a bad idea actually. Too bad it's so difficult to get weaponry onto
planes these days, maybe she and her family will holiday somewhere here in the
US. Given the general attitude at Hasbro to finances though, they might decide
to pay for the publishing rights to the RPG by firing everyone at WOTC and
moving folks from the manufacturing division over to write the whole thing up.
JM Heard
>richest. No gaming company could possibly offer her anything to change
>her mind.
That is so patently untrue. Absurd, in fact. I'll prove once and for all that
*I* am the most powerful author on Earth this June at the Ultimate Author
Fighting Competition...Let Rowling attend if she dares!
Varl
> >Several "Christian" schools around here put HP on the "banned in
> >our school" list...since it deals with witchcraft, etc. I wonder
> >if they've read their Bibles??? (see 1 Sam 28).
>
> I don't get it. What's Hewlett-Packard done wrong that's put it offside
> with Christians? Is it something to do with taking over Compaq?
Probably. Compaq is the Anti-Christ imo. Complete with Old Machine Parts
And Quirks.
--
"Sir, are you Human?"
"Negative. I am a meat popsicle."
Lizard
> brownie points. I'd tell you what I know and don't know ...but since you
> seem to be so happy to tell me what you *think* I know, I'll let you spout.
>
apologize and take the blame. I am 14 years old.
> The point is this: Potter is ideally suited for an RPG. WotC was in the
> middle of a big RPG push with the release of 3e. *get* the RPG rights for
> it. Work for em.
>
Yeah, dey can send Vinnie and Big Al over to England and have a "chat"
wit dat Rowling woman...yeah, she'll come around...(Given that she's
richer than Queen Elizabeth, I REALLY don't think it was just a matter
of not being offered enough money, eh wot? She doesn't need the money;
it's all her sense of principle. )
> You don't go "oh well, I guess all we can do is get TCG rights so we'll
> expend money on a product that doesn't fit the market. That makes as much
> sense as selling snow boots in hawaii because all the swimsuits rights were
> taken.
>
> WotC made a boo boo. Lots of companies do. The smart ones, if they survive,
> learn from it. Of course, to do that means admitting an error, which you
> would rather they not do.
>
Hmmm....the pot is calling the alabaster black.
David Sulger
>
> Makes perfect sense to me. My 7-year-old is totally into Harry, and
> every time a new creature pops up he goes to my MM to see what the thing
> looks like. The third book has a griffon, but the books calls it a
> hippogrif ... so my 7-year-old thinks that D&D is full of ^&*(%*, 'cause
> Harry can do no wrong. :)
>
Ubiquitous
>It only goes to show that if products aren't being sold, our hobby will
>take a hit.
Not to mention posting (and sharing) digitized copies of 3E products.
*cough* *cough*
--
*************************************************************************
* Political Correctness strives to impose innocuous mediocrity as the *
* standard to which we must all aspire. *
*************************************************************************
Enderian
I meant: the creature that D&D calls a griffon, Harry (actually Hagrid
in the book) calls it a hippogrif.
Bokman7757
>Narnia was never *that* big. I've already noticed the Harry Potter fad waning.
>Many are saying the latest book just doesn't seem to have the same hooks
>that
>it's predecessors did.
HARRY POTTER AND THE GOBLET OF FIRE is IMO the best in the series so far. I
ended it wanting to pick up the fifth, but then realized there wasn't a fifth
one yet. The ending just makes you want to know what happens next- things are
gettin' pretty serious.
(BTW, anyone know when the publisher estimates/hopes the fifth one will be
delivered?)
Bokman7757
>Actually, making an apointment and sending the head of the company and a
>couple of players over to have a heart to heart about why a Harry Potter
>RPG
>would be a *good thing* for kids, without talking about how much money it
>could make for them or her probably wouldn't hurt.
Assuming they *haven't* done this- they objection to "putting words in her
characters' mouths" may not be nearly as paramount as her simple concern about
revealing too much world information before she's done with the books. With
each one she's added more background, things have gotten a bit more complex-
she's probably got quite a few more surprises.
When book #7 is on the shelves it'll be worth re-opening talks. Until then I
can't see any argument or offer convincing her.
Sea Wasp
>
> >From: blak...@aol.comix.net (BlakGard)
>
> >Narnia was never *that* big. I've already noticed the Harry Potter fad waning.
> >Many are saying the latest book just doesn't seem to have the same hooks
> >that
> >it's predecessors did.
>
> HARRY POTTER AND THE GOBLET OF FIRE is IMO the best in the series so far.
I agree, overall, though if the inflation trend continues the 7th
book will have to be split over three books!
Stephenls
> I agree, overall, though if the inflation trend continues the
> 7th book will have to be split over three books!
Perhaps the fifth or sixth book /will/ be the last three books.
--
Stephenls
Geek
Arguing with Stephenls about White Wolf canon is a lot like arguing
with God over the landscaping of Heaven. -Richard Clayton
Jacob Arluck
> I figure at least 50x as many have seen the show as have played the
>video game. In that respect, the CCG did not depend on the video.
>
300 million kids have seen the show? Wow. How come I never saw it on the
Nielsen lists then?
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GU d-(+) s: a14 C++>++++$
U? P+>$ L E? W+>++$ N++> !o K w+ O- M-- V?
PS++@ PE- Y+ PGP? t- !5 X? R+ tv- b+++
DI+ D- G e* h! r- y?
-----END GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Bertil Jonell
Lizard <liz...@mrlizard.com> wrote:
>>Do you know if Rowling said why she doesn't want an RPG?
>>Cari
>
>Two main reasons have been reported:
>a)She doesn't want other people "putting words in her character's
>mouths"
>b)She is keeping a tight lid on plot developments, and doesn't want a
>lot of world detail known to a bunch of game designers.
My personal suspicion is that she simply doesn't have that amount
of world detail worked out. I think she's making it up as she goes along,
mainly on the "wouldn't it be neat if" basis.
-bertil-
--
"It can be shown that for any nutty theory, beyond-the-fringe political view or
strange religion there exists a proponent on the Net. The proof is left as an
exercise for your kill-file."
Del Rio
CSR <now...@nohow.com> wrote:
>
>She is very picky about the image of Harry, as evidenced by the amount of
>detail and control she exercized over the making of the movie.
Yes, with her input, they managed to create a wonderfully
dull movie. It looked pretty much perfect, but had no
spark.
--
Del Rio - simulationist GM, incorrigible player
"I know I promised, Lord, never again. But I also know
that YOU know what a weak-willed person I am."
Sea Wasp
>
> In article <rzAk8.20410$%6.85...@news2.telusplanet.net>,
> CSR <now...@nohow.com> wrote:
> >
> >She is very picky about the image of Harry, as evidenced by the amount of
> >detail and control she exercized over the making of the movie.
>
> Yes, with her input, they managed to create a wonderfully
> dull movie. It looked pretty much perfect, but had no
> spark.
Depends on the viewer. I thought it was wonderful, and my son was
annoyed that we wouldn't go see it again and again and again at
full-ticket prices.
(OTOH, I'll be getting the DVD the very day it goes on sale).
However, if she's picky about the image of Harry, I'm wondering if
that means that she either (A) has absolutely no taste at all, or (B)
got shafted on the contract for toy rights. The "Slime Chamber" toy is
something that I, were I the author, would invoke the "Right to Nuke
Company" clause for.
Del Rio
>
[ Harry Potter film ]
>
> Depends on the viewer. I thought it was wonderful, and my son was
>annoyed that we wouldn't go see it again and again and again at
>full-ticket prices.
Well, tastes differ. I found it pleasant to look at, but
uninvolving and with no sense of dramatic movement.
Of course, Chris Columbus isn't the guy I would have chosen
to make that movie, either - although I'm still pleased that
she didn't let Spielberg get his wretched claws on it.
*Then* we would have had to deal with endless slow-zoom soft
focus sparkling eyed faceshots, set to a swelling (like a
tumor) John Williams orchestral score... hitting you over
the head with how bloody Wondrous and Magical it all was.
Sea Wasp
>
> In article <3CA1FE...@wizvax.net>, Sea Wasp <sea...@wizvax.net> wrote:
> >
> [ Harry Potter film ]
> >
> > Depends on the viewer. I thought it was wonderful, and my son was
> >annoyed that we wouldn't go see it again and again and again at
> >full-ticket prices.
>
> Well, tastes differ. I found it pleasant to look at, but
> uninvolving and with no sense of dramatic movement.
>
> Of course, Chris Columbus isn't the guy I would have chosen
> to make that movie, either - although I'm still pleased that
> she didn't let Spielberg get his wretched claws on it.
> *Then* we would have had to deal with endless slow-zoom soft
> focus sparkling eyed faceshots, set to a swelling (like a
> tumor) John Williams orchestral score... hitting you over
> the head with how bloody Wondrous and Magical it all was.
The sound score WAS John Williams.
If she could have kidnapped Spielberg's "sense of wonder" camera
direction but kept his claws off the actual substance of the movie,
that would have been great. Stevie KNOWS how to do that trick, and
that trick is exactly right for something like Harry Potter. However,
Spielberg was already on record for wanting to make "a few changes"
(that were neither few, nor small)... so he was out in the cold.
Todd Tennis
>
> She is very picky about the image of Harry, as evidenced by the amount of
> influenced by the bad press that the general public has of RPG's and players
> ( at best we are social misfits at worst satanic nutcases ) she isn't going
> to want Harry 'tainted' by that. And if she doesn't realize that what an
> RPG would do would be to allow kids to make and play out thier own stories
> about *harry like* characters in her setting, she might not quite understand
> that people are not going to be taking control of her characters. *shrug*
>
> CSR
She may be little late as to Harry being 'tainted'. There has already
been a pretty widespread move in the hard-line Christian community to
smear Harry Potter as teaching kids witchcraft and devil worship. It
is, indeed, very similar to the hogwash claims made about D&D. I
guess if one of these folks sees the word "witch" or "sorceror" they
put the book down and call it evil on the spot.
"Maybe you should have spent more time reading books instead of
burning them." - Dr. Henry Jones, Sr.
Jim Davies
>Del Rio wrote:
>> Of course, Chris Columbus isn't the guy I would have chosen
>> to make that movie, either - although I'm still pleased that
>> she didn't let Spielberg get his wretched claws on it.
> If she could have kidnapped Spielberg's "sense of wonder" camera
>direction but kept his claws off the actual substance of the movie,
>that would have been great.
I want to see David Lynch do it. Or Terry Gilliam. Now *that* is how
to film magic.
-
Jim Davies
----------
Mind your manners, son! I've got a tall pointy hat!
CSR
Sea Wasp wrote in message <3CA1FE...@wizvax.net>...
Or what about those awful glow in the dark drink mugs that one of the fast
food places were flogging? They looked half melted. I suspect that there
was just so much demand for liscences that she delegated, and some of the
companies that were then in charge of vetting products weren't too picky.
And being as she lives on the other side of the atlantic, she probably has
no idea of some of the stuff that ended up coming out.
On the other hand though, most of the english side of my family has pretty
horrid taste if you ask me, so it could be (A) ;-)
CSR
Sea Wasp
>
> Sea Wasp <sea...@wizvax.net> typed:
> > If she could have kidnapped Spielberg's "sense of wonder" camera
> >direction but kept his claws off the actual substance of the movie,
> >that would have been great.
>
> I want to see David Lynch do it. Or Terry Gilliam. Now *that* is how
> to film magic.
Um, no thanks. Lynch does the bizarre and dark fairly well, but has
no feel AFAICT for what CHILDREN look for -- and this is a film for
children, at least as much as for us adults. Gilliam does HUMOR well,
and the absurd well. Harry Potter calls neither for bizarre and dark
nor for the absurd and humorous. It calls for the sense of wonder,
perhaps with TOUCHES of the dark and humorous (a la Roald Dahl,
Charlie and the Chocolate Factory), but mostly the sense of "ooo,
ahhh, wow". And for THAT, Spielberg is The Master. He can do it to me
even when I *know* what he's doing, even when I'm cynically saying how
much the movie sucks, he can still grab me and drag me to the "oh,
wow" moments. If you could convince him to use that talent for good
rather than evil -- i.e., just film what Rowling wrote, no mods, no
tweaks -- it would have been awe-inspiring.
Jason Eric Nelson
Jim Davies <j...@aaargh.NoBleedinSpam.org> wrote:
>
>I want to see David Lynch do it. Or Terry Gilliam. Now *that* is how
>to film magic.
Bleah, *that* is how to film a bad acid trip, plus flashbacks.
Jason Nelson
tja...@u.washington.edu
"God is like Coke - He's the real thing"
Bokman7757
>Harry Potter calls neither for bizarre and dark
>nor for the absurd and humorous.
I think it does, at times. Certainly the film didn't seem as dark as it could
have been.
>It calls for the sense of wonder,
>perhaps with TOUCHES of the dark and humorous (a la Roald Dahl,
>Charlie and the Chocolate Factory), but mostly the sense of "ooo,
>ahhh, wow". And for THAT, Spielberg is The Master.
I think it calls more for whimsy.
Take the first scene in the book and the film, with Dumbledore strolling down a
suburban street and putting out the lights with a little magical gadget. In the
book it's described in a downright straightforward style, something
not-out-of-the-ordinary at all. In the film, though, the direction and
particularly the hyperactive score treat it as SOMETHING TERRIBLY IMPORTANT.
There wasn't any subtlety to the film- all the nice "slightly magical" things
happening at the start were treated as huge "oh, wow!" moments. I think a more
talented director could have handled those scenes much better. (Also one part
of the "look" of the film bugged me- what's with all the bright sunny days in a
film set in England? Fantasy or not, my suspension of disbelief can only
stretch so far.)