Lost in Translation 63 – Adapting Games, Part V

Reply

Welcome to Lost in Translation‘s quick series about the ins and outs of adapting games to television and film.* As seen since the first post, if something is popular, someone else will want to adapt it to a different medium. Today, 2013, the most likely medium to adapt from elsewhere is the Hollywood film.

Part I – Video Games
Part II – Boardgames
Part III – Tabletop Role-Playing Games
Part IV – Adapting Games to Games

Adapting Games to Games: Tabletop RPGs

Two weeks ago, I went through how to adapt boardgames and video games as other games, leaving tabletop role-playing games aside for later. A few minutes of quick, barely scratching the surface research later had me wondering just what, exactly, had I gotten myself into.

Back in 1974, Tactical Studies Rules released Dungeons & Dragons, based on a miniatures wargame called Chainmail. Since then, D&D has been the most popular and best selling RPG released, the 800 pound gorilla of the industry. When computer gaming appeared, many games, including Rogue and its imitators**, emulated the feel and, at times, the mechanics of the RPG. Similar adventure games, such as the Ultima series and the Bard’s Tale series, owe their existence to D&D. The influence of D&D is still felt today, with terminology*** appearing in games like The Elder Scrolls, Mass Effect, and Diablo, not to mention the concept of a Massive Multiplayer Online RPG (aka, the MMORPG). Two MMORPGS, Everquest and World of Warcraft eventually had tabletop RPGs released, both based on the Dungeons & Dragons third edition open gaming license. A third, Neverwinter Nights was an SSI-licensed game based on Neverwinter in the Forgotten Realms and was available on AOL in the early 90s.

TSR and Wizards of the Coast eventually did license official video games. Strategic Simulations Inc, now owned by Ubisoft, created a series of games based on both the Forgotten Realms and Dragonlance settings. At least one project, Curse of the Azure Bonds was created as a video game, an adventure module for the RPG, and a tie-in novel, with all three having good reception on release. When WotC bought TSR and released D&D3E, Bioware received the license and released the Baldur’s Gate series of games.

D&D isn’t the only tabletop RPG, though. Other RPGs have been adapted as well. White Wolf‘s Vampire: The Masquerade has had two video games released – Vampire: The Masquerade – Bloodlines and Vampire: The Masquerade – Redemption. Hero Games’ Champions was the original inspiration for City of Heroes, which led to the Champions MMORPG. GDW’s MegaTraveller had two games, The Zhodani Conspiracy and Quest for the Ancients, both based on elements in the Third Imperium setting.

The goal, as it was back in Part III is to keep the feel of the tabletop experience. However, since many RPGs are simulating a genre already, care must be taken to avoid the added filter that the game might need. The game mechanics can be hidden away in the code; the player doesn’t need to know why he or she missed the dragon with the crossbow shot, just that the dragon’s full attention is now on the player’s character. Since there’s no guarantee on the type of character that will be played, since that will be the player’s choice, the writers will need to have the plot come from a non-player character, with the PC out to thwart the evil plans. If a game comes with a setting, the feel of the setting needs to be replicated. Fortunately, most RPGs come with illustrations, which should allow the video game designers to get a visual feel of the game. When done well, the game is successful. If not, fans of the game may avoid the video game.

This holds even if the RPG is being adapted as a boardgame. Vampire would not work well as a boardgame; the elements of the RPG include the struggle to keep the monster within in check, political machinations, and keeping the mundane world unaware that the supernatural exists and is hostile, none of which is easy to portray on a board. D&D, however, has had several boardgames based on the elements of exploring a subterranean maze and killing the evil creatures who dwell within. Ideally, an adaptation should fit within the setting, or one of the settings, of the game, feature iconic character types, and be representative of a typical game if possible.

Next week, the series wrap up.

* And theatre, though I’d be surprised if someone made that leap.
** Known as “roguelikes”, and includes Larn, Hack/, Nethack. and Diablo.
*** A non-exhaustive list of examples: Class, Level, Hit Points, attribute names

 

Fans Are Hackers

Reply
Steve Icon

On my own blog I had recently posted a rather extended rant called “You Hack Or You Die.” Yes, it’s heavy handed title-wise, yes I slipped in a “Game of Thrones Reference,”  but my basic theme is that you have to learn to modify and make things in order to survive anyway, and that it’s true in this environment and economy as well. The problem is we’ve often forgotten its importance, which is downright dangerous in these troubled times.

Yes, the thesis is depressing in some ways, but depressing or not I think it’s true – to modify things and to create is how we’ve always survived. Right now we need those skills and abilities more than ever because the world is changing fast and not always in a direction we want. Right now, I’m not sure “hackness” is being encouraged.

In fact, it can be discouraging now. People feel they have no control. People feel they can’t do anything. People feel they’re not creative, not able to make, not able to engineer, not able to hack and modify things.

This is one place where I value the HELL out of fandom, geekdom, and otakudom.

Because it’s filled with hacks and reminders of hacks. Continue reading →

Geek to Geek: Learning from Leadership

Posted on by
Reply

What was an important lesson you learned from being in a leadership position?

Tamara: For me, it was that being the boss comes with everyone else’s assumption that you know what you’re doing (and therefore, they don’t have to worry about the tasks at hand).  I was actively avoiding the Tyrannical Boss stereotype, so I put everything to a vote and sought everyone’s approval.  That didn’t work well.  If you leave too many things open to a group decision, people start to lose faith in you.  They think you don’t know what you’re doing.  I’ve found it’s best to consult others only on the MAJOR issues and take care of the everyday stuff on your own.

Serdar: It’s OK to be wrong as long as you own up and show you’ve learned something. People trust someone who’s upfront about their mistakes, and they’re willing to give a bit more to someone like that.

Steve: Knowledge and honesty is vitally important to leadership – you can’t fake it, and if you try, most people will pick up on it even if they don’t tell you.

Scott: There’s a couple.  First, I don’t like being in a position of leadership.  Too much to track.

Second, there’s a lot of responsibility, lots to keep track of, and herding cats becomes a useful skill.  Different people respond to different motivations; someone who is eager just has to be pointed at a task to be done, while a more reluctant underperson* needs coaxing.  The leader needs to keep everyone going in roughly the same direction, while keeping the goal in sight, while smoothing over internal problems, all while making the team look cohesive to outsiders.

Which is why I prefer being a support person over a leader.

* Not necessarily a minion.

Ewen: I think the most important thing to remember about leadership is that it falls to you to make the case that what you propose is worthwhile. People are generally much more willing to do things when they understand what’s going on and why. When you plan something out, it can be easy to forget that most everyone else has a different perspective from you, and that there’s a good chance that they don’t know everything that led you to think you have a great idea.

Bonnie: The most important thing you can do as a leader is listen, listen, listen. Listen to those you are leading, those who are supervising your leadership, and those you are serving. All input is  equally valuable, and the key to making decisions that benefit the entire group. You may be tempted to dismiss a piece of feedback as “They don’t know what they’re talking about,” but try seeing things from the other person’s perspective. They may have noticed something you missed.

Thank You

Posted on by
2

TamaraOh, I see I have your attention for a moment.  I know you’re busy, so I’ll be quick.  I just wanted to say a heartfelt “thank you.”

Thank you to all the geeks who spend alarming amounts of their spare time writing stories or making games or drawing pictures.  I like reading and playing games and looking at cool pictures, so thanks.  Even if I never encounter your work specifically, thank you for being a part of what keeps those art forms alive.
Continue reading →

Why We’re Bad At Networking #6: No Support Structure, No Foundation

Reply
Steve Icon

You got it, I’m still going on about why we’re bad at networking. I’ve covered issues of overload, incoherent advice, too many options, focus issues, and not pitching to the right personalities. Actually by now I think I’m even more depressed about the state of networking in our culture, and that’s saying something.

However these past columns actually illustrate a point about networking by how much we’re talking about it. Or I am talking about it, but I’m going to generalize here.

Of course we talk networking. Even when we’re talking about how bad people are at networking we’re talking . . . networking. That’s the point, right?

However nothing happens in a vacuum. The problems that we have with people’s networking can make our focus to narrow, too limited. Talking about the problems in networking, at times, can verge perilously close to missing that networking takes place in a larger context. It misses that networking requires a good support structure to make effective – something I touched on before, but not in enough detail.

Networking needs a support structure, a foundation, support materials.

Do we have a business card handy at all times? Are we easy to reach? Do we have a personal web page? Do we have at least the necessary social media presence? Do we have anything worth showing off to people – and are we showing it off? Do we have portfolios and so on?

Networking is about connecting with people. Networking is about keeping up with people. Networking is about building relationships. All fine and good, and some of us are great at reaching out to people – but the question remains have we built a foundation to make sure networking can work for us?

Networking without this foundation is like planting seeds in barren ground. Something might grow, but there’s nothing to nurture them, to give them something to work with. Just connecting with someone is not enough.

Just as bad, some people overdo this, trying to have every possible “in” for networking wether it’s a good idea or not. In this case they’re trying to pump every kind of fertilizer into the land then wonder why the seeds don’t grow, or miss a “treatment” and let their projects waste away.

This issue is one that is easy to forget because we focus so much on what can only be termed “OMG NETWORKING” over, and over, and over again. There’s so much focus on the act of Networking itself, or on Doing All The Stuff that we miss the importance of building a foundation for success. I do this at times, and I’m the guy writing these columns.

We need to have – and teach – building a good support structure for networking. Without it . . .

The result of this is:

Networking Fizzles: In the case of people who don’t have the foundation to network, their networking fizzles. They’re unremarkable, unmemorable, and hard to reach.

Networking Flames Out: In the case of people trying to do every social media thing and every technique at once, it seems they flame out. You can’t do that all unless you make a very dedicated effort, and even then you’re diluting your energies. You may well burn yourself out.

Networking Isn’t Focused: Either way the all-or-nothing approach means that people are missing, as noted, building a good foundation. This results in more failure – and often more giving up or frustration.

Lessons Are Mis-Learned: It’s easy to miss having the wrong foundation for networking, and thus easy to learn the wrong lessons. When people aren’t calling you back due to poor contact info, you need to know that as opposed to redoubling your effort to go to trade shows and job fairs.

Missing The Big Picture: Having a good foundation for networking is also a good foundation for life in general, making contacts, getting involved. Over-focus or under-working the necessary support structure affects you in many ways.

First, here’s my recommended “foundation” for networking:

  • A personal domain and web page that lets people contact you. At the minimum it should be a one pager linked to your other appropriate social media.
  • A good, clear business card that you can hand out.
  • Ensuring your resume and other appropriate media call out your skills, involvements, and abilities.
  • A regular review on your development, activities, skills, and involvements to see if they support your goals – and support people being interested in you.
  • A membership in the social media you deem important.
  • Being part of the appropriate professional associations.

This covers about 80-90% of the foundation you need in my experience.

As for getting over this problem in general:

  • Build a good foundation. Get your support system, your foundation right, so you have an example for others. Several times when I’ve talked to people it’s nice to say “do this.”
  • Encourage and discourage. Feel free to speak up on a lack of use – or overused – technology and trends. Help people focus on what’s important.
  • Think big and think long-term. We need to cultivate our lives as well as our careers, so any foundation we build for networking should help support our lives period.
  • Team Up. Team up with people to help build your support system for networking – not just by connecting, but by pooling resources. Hire your artist friend to do your business card, help that friend set up their personal website.
  • Show good examples. I love seeing a smart business card or a good technique – promote those.

We need to make sure that we have the right foundation for networking. Otherwise even our other efforts won’t pay off.

- Steven Savage

Steven Savage is a Geek 2.0 writer, speaker, blogger, and job coach.  He blogs on careers athttp://www.fantopro.com/, nerd and geek culture at http://www.nerdcaliber.com/, and does a site of creative tools at http://www.seventhsanctum.com/. He can be reached at http://www.stevensavage.com/.

Science Fiction: Boldly Going Forward

Posted on by
4

Recently, Steve penned his notes on why the old ways of scifi are best.  And colleague and friend aside, I’m going to have to disagree with him on this one.  And, as a scifi writer myself (book’s coming soon to a e-store near you!), I think I’ve got a unique perspective on that same round of thoughts, and while he did cover the gamut, I’m not sure I’d come to the same results.

Keep in mind here, I’m not by any means saying that he’s wrong – scifi novels are a proven, lasting method of delivery.  And reading isn’t going away; if anything, thanks to e-publishing and its related fields, reading has more than come back in style and is on the upswing with the younger crowds, something vitally in need in order to push the future STEM folks of tomorrow.

But where we differ is that novels aren’t just the only method.  As Rudyard Kipling once said, “there are nine and sixty ways of constructing tribal lays.  And every single one of them is right!”  I’m also approaching this from the position of the writer (for both Claude & Monet as well as the upcoming Razorblade Angel), whereas he’s approaching from the point of the editor (in this case, Serdar’s upcoming book Flight of the Vajra).  Of course, Kipling’s rule applies, and you might find you disagree with both of us.  Hey, that’s just how things work.

Continue reading →

Science Fiction: The Old Ways Are Best. For Now.

3
Steve Icon

I speculated some time ago that though we needed to have more inspiring science fiction, and that we may have had some kind of “imagination gap,” that we also had to ask what the best form is to deliver it (books, webcomics, etc.). I consider it a legitimate question since the first goal after creating the good fiction, is to get it out there.

Lately I’ve been editing Serdar’s “Flight of the Vajra” (which I can say, our friendship aside, is quite good). Sitting down to my first SF novel in awhile has made me think about my former essay and opinions. Specifically that the newer forms (webcomics, serial fiction, etc.) right now are not the best way to deliver the revolutionary/return-to-imagination SF I’m talking about.

Yes I said that.  Me the technophile and neophile is thinking we might need to take it back a notch and keep it old school for awhile. Continue reading →