Peter Hodge
03-06-1999, 04:37 AM
I know that for PS, at least, WotC is doing is exactly this - making PS more
accessible to the larger gaming audience. I believe that PS is basically
being absorbed into the Core line and any product that has planar content is
marked with the Lady of Pain symbol.
Perhaps, depending on the success of this idea, the same sort of thing could
well end up happening to the BR line?
Peter "Dragon" Hodge
E-mail: dragon@uq.net.au
Website: Dragon's Lair (
www.uq.net.au/~zzphodge )
ICQ: 2863795
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-birthright@Phaser.ShowCase.MPGN.COM
> [mailto:owner-birthright@Phaser.ShowCase.MPGN.COM]On Behalf Of Samuel
> Weiss
> Sent: Saturday, 6 March 1999 14:20
> To: birthright@mpgn.com
> Subject: [BIRTHRIGHT] - Why no BR
>
>
> A post on the PS list concering the use of PS products by non-PS fans made
> me think of something relevant to the BR cancellation, and what it might
> take to see t brought back.
> The poster essentially said that for PS products to be useable by core
> setting players, they would have to be so toned down as to be not true to
> the spirit of the PS setting.
> While I utterly disagree with him, I think it may point out the failing of
> BR. Essentially, BR players can use any Core products with minor
> conversions, but how does a Core setting user employ BR products that by
> nature rely on Bloodlines to make sense?
> There have been several rounds of discussion on Non-Blooded
> Regents. Perhaps
> that is exactly what WOTC is looking for. A way for the rules on domain
> rulership to be used by everyone, in every setting. that way, "Core BR"
> products are universally useful, and even adventures can
> crossover. "Cerilia
> Setting" products then simply have an extra line in PC/NPC descriptions,
> that of the "Bloodline-for use with Cerilia Campaigns".
> Or maybe not. Just a thought.
>
> Samwise
>
>
>
> ************************************************** ****************
> *********
> To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com
> with the line
> 'unsubscribe birthright' as the body of the message.
>
accessible to the larger gaming audience. I believe that PS is basically
being absorbed into the Core line and any product that has planar content is
marked with the Lady of Pain symbol.
Perhaps, depending on the success of this idea, the same sort of thing could
well end up happening to the BR line?
Peter "Dragon" Hodge
E-mail: dragon@uq.net.au
Website: Dragon's Lair (
www.uq.net.au/~zzphodge )
ICQ: 2863795
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-birthright@Phaser.ShowCase.MPGN.COM
> [mailto:owner-birthright@Phaser.ShowCase.MPGN.COM]On Behalf Of Samuel
> Weiss
> Sent: Saturday, 6 March 1999 14:20
> To: birthright@mpgn.com
> Subject: [BIRTHRIGHT] - Why no BR
>
>
> A post on the PS list concering the use of PS products by non-PS fans made
> me think of something relevant to the BR cancellation, and what it might
> take to see t brought back.
> The poster essentially said that for PS products to be useable by core
> setting players, they would have to be so toned down as to be not true to
> the spirit of the PS setting.
> While I utterly disagree with him, I think it may point out the failing of
> BR. Essentially, BR players can use any Core products with minor
> conversions, but how does a Core setting user employ BR products that by
> nature rely on Bloodlines to make sense?
> There have been several rounds of discussion on Non-Blooded
> Regents. Perhaps
> that is exactly what WOTC is looking for. A way for the rules on domain
> rulership to be used by everyone, in every setting. that way, "Core BR"
> products are universally useful, and even adventures can
> crossover. "Cerilia
> Setting" products then simply have an extra line in PC/NPC descriptions,
> that of the "Bloodline-for use with Cerilia Campaigns".
> Or maybe not. Just a thought.
>
> Samwise
>
>
>
> ************************************************** ****************
> *********
> To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com
> with the line
> 'unsubscribe birthright' as the body of the message.
>