Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Valatar

Why is Star Wars coming as $180 in rulebooks that are mostly reprinted info?

Recommended Posts

Are people just wanting to vent?

I would assume so. In theory, they could issue a reprint in a new format but that doesn't seem economically sound (additional cost to generate the new layout with most of the people who care already having bought anyway).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because FFG is a marketing genius and they know we will buy them (said as waiting in line for next book... whatever it is...) "Spat book for Kowakian Monkey Lizard? SHADDUP AND TAKE MY MONEY!!"

 

  Because they want short term money even if it means it's going to have an overall negative effect on player satisfaction and cost them large amounts of money in the long run.

 

  Had the books been significantly different I'd have bought them and been happy.  They aren't so I've bought nothing since EotE and consider the product line largely dead and am not terribly interested in it and only play occasionally.

 

  They are also unfortunately in the situation where most everything that was cannon is now not and new movies are coming out that is going to curb stomp everything in the system that is based on previous canon isn't helping.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because they want short term money even if it means it's going to have an overall negative effect on player satisfaction and cost them large amounts of money in the long run.

I will grant you that it will affect overall satisfaction but I think you're vastly overestimating the amount of money they'll lose as a result. A look at the release methods of large companies such as WotC suggests that your personal decision is not indicative of the larger culture's mentality.

Honestly, though, who cares if VII does "curb stomp" the books. I'm planning on playing in the Star Wars universe I envision, not the one Disney says I should. Lucas himself lost the right to determine the course of Star Wars's Destiny when he started making it all about the effects gimmicks instead of the stories.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I could certainly be wrong but I don't get the impression that FFG is having an overall negative effect on the fans of the game. Entirely opposite in fact.

 

And FFG seems willing to take from Star Wars EU whatever they feel makes for a better game, so I doubt the future movies will do nothing but contribute more material for them to use.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I could certainly be wrong but I don't get the impression that FFG is having an overall negative effect on the fans of the game. Entirely opposite in fact.

 

And FFG seems willing to take from Star Wars EU whatever they feel makes for a better game, so I doubt the future movies will do nothing but contribute more material for them to use.

 

Yeah, FFG is definitely crying all the way to the bank on this one, with their incredibly successful game they can hardly keep on the shelves, because a few fans don't agree with something they're doing. I'm not sure how they sleep at night.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've bought nothing since EotE [...] and am not terribly interested in it [...]

 

Perhaps you're not the target demographic.

 

While those of us that have observed these threads know that you harbor no particular love for what FFG has done with the line, your anecdotal frustration is not a scientific poll that can be used to measure fan response or goodwill. I was skeptical of FFG's model at first, but I now have far more goodwill towards FFG with regard to how they've handled the line than I ever did towards Wizard's of the Coast and their handling of the line, even under Saga Edition. That being said, I know I don't represent the majority of gamers out there either.

 

Lucas himself lost the right to determine the course of Star Wars's Destiny when he started making it all about the effects gimmicks instead of the stories.

 

I think Lucas lost the right to determine the course of Star Wars when he started telling authors that they could tell their stories in the Star Wars universe with the understanding that those stories were canon. Hand-waving and saying, "Those don't match my vision anymore, so they never happened." doesn't mean those stories were never told, (for better or worse) nor does it take the books off your shelf.

 

It certainly didn't take the money Lucas made off of them out of his bank account.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All snark aside, I went into this thing fully understanding the business model and with the intent of being a completionist. A few years in and I've now decided that I don't want or need a 30+ book library weighing in at over $500 to play an rpg set in the Star Wars universe. EotE is fantastic and suits my needs just fine. I'm going to focus on that line and not mess with the rest. I believe complaints about the business model itself are a bit unfounded given how upfront FFG has been about product intent but I also no longer believe that you have to buy every single thing this company spits out at you to have a good time.

 

I know, madness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are people just wanting to vent?  It is not like FFG is going to change course 2/3rds of the way through the development cycle.

 

More importantly - even if they were to wake up tomorrow and say "Wow, this was a terrible idea!" - the core book line is nearly done. It's way too late to change course now.

 

They aren't so I've bought nothing since EotE and consider the product line largely dead and am not terribly interested in it and only play occasionally.

 

That's okay, I'm more than making up for your slack.

 

Lucas himself lost the right to determine the course of Star Wars's Destiny when he started making it all about the effects gimmicks instead of the stories.

 

That's crazy talk - it's his **** universe. He can (well, could) do whatever he wanted to. If he wanted to release a movie called "Star Wars III: Lil' Annie and Jar-jar's big adventure" with the most batshit crazy German existential directing style shot on black and white 8mm film stock, consisting of a script that was nothing but a blackface minstrel show - you know what, it's his movie. That's perfectly okay! He can do whatever he wants.

 

Granted you have the right not to spend your money on that. This is fine too - but say that he has no right to tell whatever story he wants is insanity.

Edited by Desslok

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

That's crazy talk - it's his **** universe. He can (well, could) do whatever he wanted to. If he wanted to release a movie called "Star Wars III: Lil' Annie and Jar-jar's big adventure" with the most batshit crazy German existential directing style shot on black and white 8mm film stock, consisting of a script that was nothing but a blackface minstrel show - you know what, it's his movie. That's perfectly okay! He can do whatever he wants.

 

Granted you have the right not to spend your money on that. This is fine too - but say that he has no right to tell whatever story he wants is insanity.

 

 

Oh, so you have seen the Ewok Adventure movies too?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Granted you have the right not to spend your money on that. This is fine too - but say that he has no right to tell whatever story he wants is insanity.

You're utterly missing the point. The universe stopped being "his" long ago. Exactly when depends on your point of view, but while I agree with you that he has the right to tell any story he wants, at this point it isn't actually any more valid or "canon" than work produced by EU authors or even fan fiction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And the foundation of your assertion is...what exactly?

What foundation do I need? Human nature? Story telling traditions that date from prehistory? We're not talking math or morality; we're talking sociology. It is a sociological constant that neither inspiration nor interpretation of art belong to the originator. Lucas *had* legal rights to the brand and to particular trademarks (such as the words "droids" and "Jedi") and to the particular source media. However, even legally he never had a right to the concepts. Socially, he has even less. As thousands of years of storytelling traditions show us; once a story is told it takes on a life of its own. Edited by T3CHN0Shaman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So...I could write a story set in the Star Wars universe and it would be legal to sell it so long as I never mentioned Jedi, droids, Coruscant, Hutts, and all the rest of the framing that makes it uniquely "Star Wars".  That would be great...except for the small fact that no one would know it was a Star Wars story.

 

I think you've just massively stretched the concept of ownership to provide legitimacy for whatever it is you want to have happened in the SW universe.  You are right that stories can take on a life of their own, but that's not a compelling argument about ownership.  As a GM I'm hosting SW stories, but I don't kid myself that they have a life beyond my table.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure if this has come up (may have missed it) but I posit a potential reason for the use of three compatible cores.

 

Back in the wotc days of the license, back in the 2000-2005 days, they had IIRC a restriction in their license that they could only produce 4 books per year related to the RPG.  That was a single quarterly release.  Now, looking back at the release schedule for EotE, this was about the release rate for those books over the last year and a half, or so.

 

When the first rebellion splat was announced, I was concerned that it would mean that an edge book wouldn't come out Q4 but then the hutt book was announced.

 

"What's the point?" you ask?  Well, lets say that FFG's license prevents them from issuing more than one book per quarter, per game line.  So rolling out the Cores as three separate games may give them more latitude regarding releases, and allow them to tailor their output better than making the system a single core release.

 

I have not knowledge of the FFG-lucas licensing arrangements.  But if these are in anyway similar, then I would not surprised if something like this plays into the decision a little.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you've just massively stretched the concept of ownership to provide legitimacy for whatever it is you want to have happened in the SW universe.  You are right that stories can take on a life of their own, but that's not a compelling argument about ownership.  As a GM I'm hosting SW stories, but I don't kid myself that they have a life beyond my table.

I haven't actually stretched the concept at all. Legal ownership has nothing to do with the legitimacy of stories. That's all in the minds (and metaphorically, the hearts) of the people consuming that story. You say your stories don't have a life beyond your table, but you have other people at your table. You share your stories with those people who use those stories in their idea of what the Star Wars universe is. They share those stories with others, they bring their changed understanding to other games and discussions, and they pass on your version of the Star Wars universe which mingles with others and creates something greater. The Star Wars universe is a living concept that mutates and grows by the contributions of those who, through their conceptions and interactions, participate in it. This is what the EU is. This is why, while the legal trappings may belong to an individual or corporation, the concept of the Star Wars universe doesn't belong to anyone. Edited by T3CHN0Shaman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys, arguing about who Star Wars "belongs" to is just nerd entitlement whining.

 

You can like official Star Wars stories or you can not like them. You can like bootleg/fan-fiction Star Wars stories or you can not. You can like how FFG puts out books or you can not like it.

 

None of that matters. Why argue about it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@shaman:But in this instance, there is an authority on what is and is not inclusive.  Your stating that there is no ownership, but to tell your starwars story and be seen as credible, you need the stamp of approval.  Hell, look at the solid block-o-text that Donovan has on his fan supplement that says (to paraphrase) "Please don't sue me.  I just like the game and want to share that with others.  Pretty please don't sue me."

 

So what your talking about is the difference between legitimate creation of a property (your story) and the general recognition by a governing body to recognize your story.

 

It's like (not to drudge up murky real world issues) recognition of Palestine by the UN and not by Israel or the USA.  The authoritative body that is Lucas Film Licensing determines what is and is not Star wars, not the whims of a table of people in the Midwest (not directed at you, just a generic concept).

 

Like it or lump it, Lucas Film has every right to promote, tear down, destroy, or retire their IP, and no matter what happens, we as people can do very little about it.  You are free to not pay attention to the official story (creating your own apocrypha) but they are just that.  Minor tomes of dubious origin, not widely recognized and scoffed at by the dominant groups.

 

At least in one man's opinion.

 

@ progressions: because we're bored at work?

Edited by Thebearisdriving

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys, arguing about who Star Wars "belongs" to is just nerd entitlement whining.

Yeah, no. If I were arguing about whether or not Lucas has the right to continue to write whatever stories he wants in the Star Wars universe I'd agree with you. But my point is more that what is and is not part of the Star Wars universe can only be determined on an individual level or on a larger level, by consensus; not by the say-so of someone who lost control of his creation long ago.

 

Why argue about it?

Because its also human nature to respond to a challenge (or to assume dominance if a challenge is forfeited). ;) Also, because one cannot change an opinion without actually making an effort to convince. *shrug*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what your talking about is the difference between legitimate creation of a property (your story) and the general recognition by a governing body to recognize your story.

Aside from (accidental) redundant word choice, yeah, pretty much. Except that I am arguing that legal authority to determine what may or may not bear the marks of a brand does not ipso facto convey authority to determine what is or is not a valid contribution to a concept behind that brand.

Edited by T3CHN0Shaman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@shaman: See in this instance though the social contract doesn't actually respect/represent the right of the majority.  In fact, it is safeguarding the rights of an individual/corporation to exercise it's intellectual ownership w/o your say so, at least on a public scale. 

 

LFL has no rights to tell you privately what you're able to think or say, but it does turn your version of SW into your version, not the version, and unless millions of fans rally behind you, it's not likely to make a difference, or receive any credibility.

 

A good counter to this is Pathfinder/paizo essentially appropriated the D&D IP, but not the actual IP.  They (through WOtc's legal concent) created a fantasy world/system that has usurped the D&D IPs in large order.  but that had thousands of people that bought into that, not 5 people in a living room.  Scale, sadly, is key.

Edited by Thebearisdriving

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think George Lucas is trying to tell anybody what they can or can't do in their own game. :)

 

Personally I might use this for my next campaign:

 

[*snip*]Patton Oswalt's Star Wars rant[/*snip*]

 

*snerk* Neither do I really. My actual quote was:

 

Honestly, though, who cares if VII does "curb stomp" the books. I'm planning on playing in the Star Wars universe I envision, not the one Disney says I should. Lucas himself lost the right to determine the course of Star Wars's Destiny when he started making it all about the effects gimmicks instead of the stories. 
Edited by T3CHN0Shaman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I don't think George Lucas is trying to tell anybody what they can or can't do in their own game. :)

 

Personally I might use this for my next campaign:

 

[*snip*]Patton Oswalt's Star Wars rant[/*snip*]

 

*snerk* Neither do I really. My actual quote was:

 

Honestly, though, who cares if VII does "curb stomp" the books. I'm planning on playing in the Star Wars universe I envision, not the one Disney says I should. Lucas himself lost the right to determine the course of Star Wars's Destiny when he started making it all about the effects gimmicks instead of the stories. 

 

 

But what kind of stats would you give to Thanos?

 

And do you think Spider-Robot Chewie would have shields like a droideka?

 

This could make it hard for Wolverine and mind-controlled Sabertooth to take him on. Can adamantium claws go through a ray shield?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Scale, sadly, is key.

Well, yeah. What did you think I meant by consensus? Still, in some sense everyone has their own version of the Star Wars universe and its only by sharing those versions that we can hope to effect a consensus of the Star Wars universe. And why wouldn't we? The governing authority has seen fit to tell us that we should put aside the consensus we agreed to (in the form of the Expanded Universe and the extensive discussions of it) in favor of whatever they have planned next.

Edited by T3CHN0Shaman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah... another sociologist? You know what I find most troubling about much sociology and sociological thinking? It's amazingly crap and flimsy philosophy in so many instances it's become rather embarrassing...

 

Now, whether or not there's a "social" right or "natural" right for anyone to create and claim some sort of part or "ownership" over a story or not, falls in a vastly different category than whether or not there's a legal right. The premisses for these different perspectives are so different it makes little sense to discuss it.

 

So, yeah, on one level anything "put out there" belongs to the collective consciousness of mankind, history and yada yada, but that is a rather abstract way of thinking about it, and carries little weight in most cases - like here for instance. While intersubjectivity and phenomenology are interesting perspectives on (social) reality, I've realised that most people just don't care. Sadly.

 

So, keep what of Legends you want, but it's still not canon (unless referred to by canon sources) - it might be your canon, but that's only relevant to you and perhaps your players. If that's all that matter, then there's no point discussing it, no one can prevent you from doing that, whereas Disney and LF can scratch all of that literary faecal flotsam and replace it with something else. Something more coherent and thought through. Not guaranteeing good quality of course, but the track record of SW is pretty ... meh... particularly the novels from EU/Legends... shudder... :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...