Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="geoffrey d`glanville" data-source="post: 2080630" data-attributes="member: 29329">To ivocaliban and Seeker95: Thanks for the nice comments, it`s always nice for a newcomer to be greeted warmly, and yes, Seeker95 you were right in interpreting my opinion about the Greyhawk setting treatment.I, personally, hope that one day it does get its own full-clour HC (as I would like to see for other setting, like Planescape, e.g.)To cholke: Of course I cannot speak for 300+ million Europeans<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />, but I guess that a beautiful product generally sells better than a mediocre looking one. Of course, content is the prime concern, but since WotC raised the measuring stick very high since Fall 2000 for Rpg books, I guess our tastes also did (at least mine).Let us assume that for one moment that Greyhawk was the way superior setting to, let`s say the Forgotten Realms setting; a newcomer to the game, let`s say a kid at the age of 8-12 stumbles into a gaming store in search of that "freaky D&D".Then, he would see more than 10 beautifully designed HC`s about the Forgotten Realms and, on the other hand, the Living Greyhawk Gazatteer. Which setting do you think would he start? I know which one I´d have chosen at that age. And sinve Rpg`s do have a problem with bringing in the younger ones, I think the looks of it is a big factor. I just want to say that some former D&D settings are treated like step-children by WotC (although I fully understand their economic interest to concentrate on the products/settings that sold well in the past) and that is why that they do not only sell weakly, but they are in danger of dying out, at least of what I tell over here in Europe, and that is the second largest market for WotC, if I`m right. It is just a pity, that`s all I wanted to state.Also you are certainly right about the fact that a good few crunchy aspects of the book are still a little bit too overpowered, but since that is obviuosly the style that some people play, I guess that WotC also wanted to satisfy that group of potential buyers (or Dave Noonan just wanted to right the damn` thing in there for his own cleric<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />)To testament: Yes, of course, art is highly subjective. That is why I chose my words wisely as to not insult somebody (mainly the artist, of course); I hope I`ve succeeded. But when I think that a picture is not good, there`s no point for me as a reviewer not to say it, or is there?Thanks for the feedback, guys, and keep on gaming!</blockquote>

Verification