Masquerade
First Post
(1) Al-Qadim and (2) Spelljammer are the only listed settings in which I would have any interest, but I would have to be very impressed with the product before I considered paying for another setting book.
Brilliant Idea for WotC: "Classic Settings" books (and a poll, of sorts)
- Thread starter Mercurius
- Start date
Ruin Explorer
Legend
1. Planescape
2. Dark Sun
3. Spelljammer
4. Al-Qadim
5. Dragonlance
6. Birthright
Would be my list, in order. None of the other ones mentioned would be of interest to me, and I don't think one of my favourite settings, Taladas in Dragonlance, would function under 4E rules and ethos *at all*. It's nearly the diametric opposite of the "MORE FANTASY! LESS SIMULATIONISM!" ethos that dominates 4E. I'm pretty sure 1-4 would all sell very significantly well. I'm kind of nervous putting Planescape up, because I can see how they could REALLY horribly mangle it if the wrong person was put in charge of it.
2. Dark Sun
3. Spelljammer
4. Al-Qadim
5. Dragonlance
6. Birthright
Would be my list, in order. None of the other ones mentioned would be of interest to me, and I don't think one of my favourite settings, Taladas in Dragonlance, would function under 4E rules and ethos *at all*. It's nearly the diametric opposite of the "MORE FANTASY! LESS SIMULATIONISM!" ethos that dominates 4E. I'm pretty sure 1-4 would all sell very significantly well. I'm kind of nervous putting Planescape up, because I can see how they could REALLY horribly mangle it if the wrong person was put in charge of it.
Giltonio_Santos
Hero
The ones I'd buy:
1. Dark Sun
2. Ravenloft
3. Jakandor
4. Kara-tur
5. Greyhawk
6. Birthright
7. Mystara
8. Planescape
I Woudn't buy: Dragonlance, Spelljammer
Don't Care: Al-Qadim, Maztica
Also, I'd like to see something like Council of Wyrms done again. Man, I was a huge fan of that box.
Cheers,
1. Dark Sun
2. Ravenloft
3. Jakandor
4. Kara-tur
5. Greyhawk
6. Birthright
7. Mystara
8. Planescape
I Woudn't buy: Dragonlance, Spelljammer
Don't Care: Al-Qadim, Maztica
Also, I'd like to see something like Council of Wyrms done again. Man, I was a huge fan of that box.
Cheers,
Doug McCrae
Legend
1. Greyhawk
But would these setting books sell? Only DMs would be buying them so it's not like Complete Warrior and the like which mostly cater to players. And unlike adventures, which any DM can use, setting books are, by their very nature, setting specific. I believe WotC's market research showed that slightly over half of DMs homebrew their settings. So you're looking at 50% of DMs right there. And then there's the problem that out of that 50% only a small proportion like particular settings. This last problem could be dealt with by only publishing the most popular settings, such as Planescape and Greyhawk, but you're still looking at a fraction of half of DMs, a very small market.
But would these setting books sell? Only DMs would be buying them so it's not like Complete Warrior and the like which mostly cater to players. And unlike adventures, which any DM can use, setting books are, by their very nature, setting specific. I believe WotC's market research showed that slightly over half of DMs homebrew their settings. So you're looking at 50% of DMs right there. And then there's the problem that out of that 50% only a small proportion like particular settings. This last problem could be dealt with by only publishing the most popular settings, such as Planescape and Greyhawk, but you're still looking at a fraction of half of DMs, a very small market.
sirwmholder
First Post
The only thing I need to ask about settings is why? Instead of rereleasing settings maybe just release Places of Note... if the mechanics are solid and don't need to be changed from setting to setting... then there is no reason all of the things that made these settings great couldn't exist in the same PoL world.Mercurius said:
For instance...
Instead of a Birthright "setting" describe how large scale combat works with coordinated troop movement. Include examples of bloodlines and what benefits they grant.
Instead of a Dark Sun "setting" publish a Deflier class and explain the consequences of adding one to your world. Psionics are promised to function as an extension of core (Yes! finally) so no need to go into detail on how to add Psionics to your game.
These are just a couple of examples. After mechanical differences have been stripped out then you are left with different flavors of fluff... all of it can fit in a PoL setting. Down with settings, long live the Points of Light!
William Holder
Ruin Explorer
Legend
sirwmholder said:
I really really really, and I mean this with love, but I really don't think you get why people pay money for settings at all.
I would never pay a penny for either of the things you suggest, but I would gladly buy a Dark Sun or Birthright 4E. Why? Because I'm interested in a COMPLETE setting that I can use. That makes sense. That isn't "genericised" in order to fit into any number of possible settings as a "component". I think almost everyone who buys a setting as opposed to using a homebrew is looking for that completeness, the ready-made aspect, not the self-assembly aspect. Note that I did not buy any of the 3E "self-assembly" books, either. Maybe a lot of other people did. Anecdotes suggest otherwise, but only sales figures could prove anything.
Anyway, settings are for completeness and AVOIDING doing lots of work!
sirwmholder
First Post
Fair enough. What got me thinking on this line of thought was take away the mechanical differences between DragonLance and Greyhawk... shake up the pantheon and the average player wouldn't be able to tell the difference. I know there are no Draconians in Greyhawk or Steel Dragons in DragonLance... but I doubt the average player would.Ruin Explorer said:
Just a thought,
William Holder
Similar Threads
