-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
another WotC article: How to add (X) to Forgotten Realms
- Thread starter Driddle
- Start date
Glyfair
Explorer
Faraer said:
The problem with focusing on setting specific content is that it's inherently limiting. Yes, articles are usually transferable, but there are a lot of people like SteveC who will not read an article on a specific setting rather than read it to find what applies to their campaign.
Of course, if you ignore a supported setting than there is a significant number of people who won't subscribe to your magazine (or whatever). I know I considered dropping my Paizo subscriptions when the Eberrron content dried up (there were other contributing factors that made me consider this, but they were tied into the lack of Eberron material).
Nepenthe said:
I disagree. The simple evidence is that the novel schedule is filled. I think there are plenty of stories to tell. They've just exhausted the standard books to do over the years and the fans are rejecting the experiements.
Last edited:
There are people who temperamentally prefer setting information to be very light, as in many 'generic' articles; there are very involved named-setting-specific articles which are genuinely hard to transfer; there are people who are prejudiced against anything with setting logos (or particular setting logos) and avoid it irrationally. None of us really knows how many in each case.
And everything is limiting. Looking at the current D&D home page, lots won't be interested in behind-the-scenes information, miniatures puzzles, or rules clarifications for optional books. The true lowest common denominator is very small, and an information source that catered so narrowly wouldn't appeal broadly.
I did let my Dragon subscription lapse in 2005 for the lack of Realms articles. It wasn't the only reason, but it pushed the decision past the threshold.
They haven't come close to exhausting the standard sourcebooks about the Realms. But that's a whole 'nother matter.
And everything is limiting. Looking at the current D&D home page, lots won't be interested in behind-the-scenes information, miniatures puzzles, or rules clarifications for optional books. The true lowest common denominator is very small, and an information source that catered so narrowly wouldn't appeal broadly.
I did let my Dragon subscription lapse in 2005 for the lack of Realms articles. It wasn't the only reason, but it pushed the decision past the threshold.
They haven't come close to exhausting the standard sourcebooks about the Realms. But that's a whole 'nother matter.
Last edited:
Glyfair
Explorer
Faraer said:
However, a setting specific article has these limiting factors in addition to the setting limitation. They tend to add up.
I'm not saying they shouldn't do campaign specific articles, quite the opposite. However, you do have to look at both sides of the pictuire.
But have they exhausted the ones that will sell? Still, this is all speculation since I don't believe WotC has addressed their Realms output.
I think they often don't add up for the reason that 'generic' articles contain assumptions, sensibilities and details that can be equivalent to those of named settings. No named setting doesn't mean no setting. But they add up enough to mean less setting material overall, which is fine with me.Glyfair said:
Again, not as far as anyone outside Wizards knows.
Last edited:
Desdichado
Hero
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=products/dndlist&brand=fr&year=2007&tablesort=1
Granted, most of those are novels, but that hardly seems like a product line that's being "left to die." And not all of them are novels. Am I missing something? Was there some announcement that I didn't see or something?
Granted, most of those are novels, but that hardly seems like a product line that's being "left to die." And not all of them are novels. Am I missing something? Was there some announcement that I didn't see or something?
an_idol_mind
Explorer
Wow...are the Realms really not selling well? Or is this another online rumor, like the inevitability of 4th edition coming next year (even though it didn't come this year, or last year, or the year before that)?
The Realms have been around as a setting for 20 years now. Seems a shame to cancel them. If I were to run a published campaign setting, the Forgotten Realms would be near the top of my list. My hope personally would be to see WotC gear things up for a revised campaign setting which could serve as a jumping on point to people who have missed the last few years of big events. It would also give them a chance to alter the tone of the setting slightly, so not every event is earth-shattering and world-changing.
The Realms have been around as a setting for 20 years now. Seems a shame to cancel them. If I were to run a published campaign setting, the Forgotten Realms would be near the top of my list. My hope personally would be to see WotC gear things up for a revised campaign setting which could serve as a jumping on point to people who have missed the last few years of big events. It would also give them a chance to alter the tone of the setting slightly, so not every event is earth-shattering and world-changing.
The only future 3.5 FR products I'd like to see are Kara-Tur, and Al-Qadim.
Similar Threads
