Destiny is wrapping up, stoking our speculation flames some more on the future of the license...

https://www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/news/2020/1/14/the-saga-concludes/

On 1/13/2020 at 9:53 AM, Kualan said:

I think a lot of the ill feeling comes from the fact that this doesn't seem to be a measure taken to keep the company afloat (desperate times, desperate measures, etc) but rather it is in line with long-standing rumours that the owners of FFG are looking to sell so this "streamlining" the company is being done to simply buff its perceived value on the market rather than out of fiscal necessity.

Of course, FFG could clarify a lot of this if they were to address this in a public statement - which they have thus far declined to do.

I don't understand this chain of logic. I work for a company whose owners are trying to streamline their company so it will be more appealing to buyers and I'm helping them. Why? Because its their retirement. There is nothing remotely immoral about that. People build companies to make money for the stakeholders. What is more, healthy companies need to be profitable over the long term or they go under. If you don't constantly look at how to maintain maximum efficiency you can, instead of laying off a few people or shuttering one department, go completely out of business. At that point, everyone working for you is now unemployed. What is more: we the customers aren't owed an explanation for why they chose to downsize a department. That's between FFG and its now former employees. The only information they really need to share is 1) whether or not they are keeping the license, and 2) whether or not they are going to keep producing products.

7 minutes ago, Kualan said:

Destiny is wrapping up, stoking our speculation flames some more on the future of the license...

https://www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/news/2020/1/14/the-saga-concludes/

Speculation without far more information is pointless.

2 minutes ago, Vondy said:

I don't understand this chain of logic. I work for a company whose owners are trying to streamline their company so it will be more appealing to buyers and I'm helping them. Why? Because its their retirement. There is nothing remotely immoral about that. People build companies to make money for the stakeholders. What is more, healthy companies need to be profitable over the long term or they go under. If you don't constantly look at how to maintain maximum efficiency you can, instead of laying off a few people or shuttering one department, go completely out of business. At that point, everyone working for you is now unemployed. What is more: we the customers aren't owed an explanation for why they chose to downsize a department. That's between FFG and its now former employees. The only information they really need to share is 1) whether or not they are keeping the license, and 2) whether or not they are going to keep producing products.

With respect, I neither said it was immoral nor that we as customers were entitled to an explanation. Wanting an explanation is not the same as saying I have the right to one.

22 minutes ago, Vondy said:

Speculation without far more information is pointless.

Nonsense; the point is to sip on the fine wine of schadenfreude. Every burning dumpster is a potential source of warmth for someone.

1 hour ago, Kualan said:

Destiny is wrapping up, stoking our speculation flames some more on the future of the license...

https://www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/news/2020/1/14/the-saga-concludes/

Destiny was white hot at launch, but very swiftly cooled. Frankly, I’ve been surprised that it was still around in the past year or so. Purely anecdotal, but from my understanding, the player community here in my area dried up due to what was characterized as horribly broken mechanics.

The Destiny closure is what made me find out about this thread. I heard about the FFI stuff when it happened, but never heard anything about the RPGs. The fact that they're open about the Destiny thing, I think, does give a little more hope toward the previous comment about the RPG lines still being ongoing.

On 1/12/2020 at 6:38 AM, Makwiesel said:

I'd love to see them come out with a re-working of the material into a GM guide and Player's guide that encompasses all the races and classes into just a few books to make it easy for a player to get in, but as others have said- even with what's out there folks can play on forever....... but new players won't be attracted to the game when new material dries up and you don't see it in stores anymore...

I got into the Star Wars RPG pretty late. What was it? Last year (I don't remember but I know I have posts around here that would show it)?

I think the way the three lines were initially released was interesting, and probably worked out well enough at the time, but it's kind of a nightmare to join late for largely unnecessary reasons (and I caught up on most of what I wanted to catch up on). Even if it would negate a lot of the spending I've already done, I've been really wanting to see a soft Second Edition of the RPG, that doesn't do any significant changes to the rules, but has a streamlined presentation with a new universal Core Rulebook, while picking up a few things that I've heard Genesys improved upon. As it is, my DM absolutely loved getting the Gear and NPC books for Christmas, despite their lack of worldbuilding, which is otherwise one of their favorite things about the books, because it's so much more convenient than having basic game pieces spread across three lines.

Frankly, I think the line could get a second wind out of something like that, and there's definitely a lot of material they could still capitalize on (like the entire Sequel Trilogy, and re-releasing existing Mandalorian-themed rules along with new content from the show would be pretty popular).

Well, the good news is that FFG didnt leave Destiny players hanging. They got a very definite "We are sunsetting the game" notice. As the RPG has not gotten something similar, I'm going to look at the silver lining!

At least until the Vehicle book comes out and we get our pink slip. Then I shall be sad.

3 hours ago, Vondy said:

I don't understand this chain of logic. I work for a company whose owners are trying to streamline their company so it will be more appealing to buyers and I'm helping them. Why? Because its their retirement. There is nothing remotely immoral about that. People build companies to make money for the stakeholders. What is more, healthy companies need to be profitable over the long term or they go under. If you don't constantly look at how to maintain maximum efficiency you can, instead of laying off a few people or shuttering one department, go completely out of business. At that point, everyone working for you is now unemployed. What is more: we the customers aren't owed an explanation for why they chose to downsize a department. That's between FFG and its now former employees. The only information they really need to share is 1) whether or not they are keeping the license, and 2) whether or not they are going to keep producing products.

Except this isn't Mom n Pop's Friendly Game Co that they've built up and now want to sell to retire.

This is venture capitalist investors buying a company, then stripping it down to make a quick turnaround. It's a **** of a lot different.

23 minutes ago, Stethemessiah said:

Except this isn't Mom n Pop's Friendly Game Co that they've built up and now want to sell to retire.

This is venture capitalist investors buying a company, then stripping it down to make a quick turnaround. It's a **** of a lot different.

except it is a mom and pop because the Owners of FFG built it from the ground up.

2 minutes ago, Daeglan said:

except it is a mom and pop because the Owners of FFG built it from the ground up.

Certain Point of View time.

That original company was already sold, though, to Asmodee. Asmodee, in turn, was purchased by a venture capital firm. So is it still mom and pop? Is Lucasfilm still an independent film studio after being purchased by Disney?

12 minutes ago, Stethemessiah said:

Except this isn't Mom n Pop's Friendly Game Co that they've built up and now want to sell to retire.

This is venture capitalist investors buying a company, then stripping it down to make a quick turnaround. It's a **** of a lot different.

Its still a business and venture capitalists are still doing business. if you don't like the way they do business or why they are doing business you can always choose not to do business with them! That's market economics. The only people the owners owe an explanation to are their investors and, to a lesser degree, the employees who were laid off. We the fans are not shareholders with actual profits, losses, and invested money in the company on the line. We are not entitled to explanations for internal business decisions. Whether the goal is retirement, windfalls, or just straight up profits is really beside the point. Our investment is in product, not stock. I've been laid off and it sucks, but this really has zero to do with us.

11 minutes ago, Vondy said:

but this really has zero to do with us.

Weird stance to take. No one so far has argued from a position of entitlement but people have just spoken up about the way it makes them feel. Also, there is nothing wrong with vocalizing a dislike of venture capitalism.

5 hours ago, DanteRotterdam said:

There is a great podcast where they dissect A.J.’s show week by week called Knowledge Fight. Totally recommended.

Omg thanks for the podcast! It’s awesome!

1 hour ago, Daeglan said:

except it is a mom and pop because the Owners of FFG built it from the ground up.

But it was then already purchased bh Asmodee, who on turn were bough by said venture capitalists.

1 hour ago, Vondy said:

Its still a business and venture capitalists are still doing business. if you don't like the way they do business or why they are doing business you can always choose not to do business with them! That's market economics. The only people the owners owe an explanation to are their investors and, to a lesser degree, the employees who were laid off. We the fans are not shareholders with actual profits, losses, and invested money in the company on the line. We are not entitled to explanations for internal business decisions. Whether the goal is retirement, windfalls, or just straight up profits is really beside the point. Our investment is in product, not stock. I've been laid off and it sucks, but this really has zero to do with us.

Except it does. We may not be shareholders, but as customers we are, like the shareholders and employees, absolutely stakeholders, and any company or investor that ignores the views, feelings, and opinions, of arguably the most important group of stakeholders would be a truly blinkered one that is doomed to fail.

Legion is going strong is it not? I don't think FFG is done with the franchise. I'll hold out hopes that the rpg line still has life in it and they will have freelance writers for future content.

2 minutes ago, stormquiver said:

Legion is going strong is it not? I don't think FFG is done with the franchise. I'll hold out hopes that the rpg line still has life in it and they will have freelance writers for future content.

I'm sure that having no permanent in-house RPG staff will do wonders for the consistency and quality of future products (assuming any are forthcoming). OF course, if future projects are just more compilations of previous material, then I can just expect the same errors to be carried forward.

19 hours ago, daggertx said:

A monolithic corporation in bed with China does not decided what is and is not cannon. The players and fans on a personal level based on their own subjective needs/beliefs do. If we want a video game or comic to be considered cannon, it is.

Lucasfilm decides what is canon and what is not.

You get to decide what is headcanon and what is not.

4 hours ago, micheldebruyn said:

Lucasfilm decides what is canon and what is not.

You get to decide what is headcanon and what is not.

Every Star Wars customer is entitled to decide what's canon or not. What will Disney do? Sue people who disagree with their take on canon? In fact, there are probably thousands of canons out there and I think it is not only okay, it is good.

I wholeheartedly agree, "players and fans on a personal level based on their own subjective needs/beliefs do".

There is capital C Canon, and that is what Disney decides it is, and then there is the important canon, headcanon, which is what you want it to be. There, are we all agreed?

10 minutes ago, P-47 Thunderbolt said:

There is capital C Canon, and that is what Disney decides it is, and then there is the important canon, headcanon, which is what you want it to be. There, are we all agreed?

And then there is double N cannon, for firing soulless executives out.

22 minutes ago, P-47 Thunderbolt said:

There is capital C Canon, and that is what Disney decides it is, and then there is the important canon, headcanon, which is what you want it to be. There, are we all agreed?

A charming and most diplomatic way to define this. 😁 To me your definition of the term imporatant canon is what I wholeheartedly agree on. And this is what I mentioned a couple of times, everybody has their own canon, that is valid to them. The ingenius approach of FFG towards an SW RPG, focusing on the OT is what everybody can agree to be the undisputed canon. That's why I dearly hope they will continue producing Star Wars RPG stuff. I could imagine some revised rules stuff in future.

46 minutes ago, DarthDude said:

Every Star Wars customer is entitled to decide what's canon or not. What will Disney do? Sue people who disagree with their take on canon? In fact, there are probably thousands of canons out there and I think it is not only okay, it is good.

I wholeheartedly agree, "players and fans on a personal level based on their own subjective needs/beliefs do".

Claiming that canon is subjective is the same as saying that canon doesn't exist.

Disney doesn't care even a little bit how much or how little you accept the official Lucasfilm canon. Neither does Lucasfilm. But just because I really, really don't want Midichlorians to be part of canon doesn't make this so.

Quote

The ingenius approach of FFG towards an SW RPG, focusing on the OT is what everybody can agree to be the undisputed canon.

Even George Lucas can't agree that the OT is undisputed canon. He kept changing bits of it as long as he could.

1 minute ago, micheldebruyn said:

Even George Lucas can't agree that the OT is undisputed canon. He kept changing bits of it as long as he could.

Macklunkey!

49 minutes ago, DarthDude said:

Every Star Wars customer is entitled to decide what's canon or not.

Wtf? This is not how any of this works.