Dark Sun - Player's Guide rendered obsolete

[Mouseferatu]

The claims come a combination of my personal experiences as a player of 20 years (specifically about what people were playing back then and still play today) and everything I have read about the subject. Feel free to research it, perhaps I could be wrong. However pricing of 2nd edition Dark Sun material on Amazon shows me that there isn't a lot of love out there for the setting, most of the products are priced like junk, a penny, 44 cents, etc. Only the main boxed set commands any sort of collectible price.

I'm afraid you're incorrect on several levels.

1) While DS was never as huge as, say, FR or the like, it was one of the more popular of TSR's "second tier" settings.

2) The fall of TSR cannot be attributed to Dark Sun, or to any single setting line. Rather, it can be attributed to--among many bad management decisions--the continued support of so many game lines, and the fact that profits from successful lines were used to prop up failing lines.

I mean, do you really think WotC would rerelease a setting that had failed? They do have access to TSR's sales figures, after all.

 

[ggroy]

2) The fall of TSR cannot be attributed to Dark Sun, or to any single setting line. Rather, it can be attributed to--among many bad management decisions--the continued support of so many game lines, and the fact that profits from successful lines were used to prop up failing lines.

Wonder how many D&D settings fell into the "subsidized" category. Or for that matter, which non-D&D TSR product lines were being subsidized by D&D sales.

 

[Keefe the Thief]

Wonder how many D&D settings fell into the "subsidized" category. Or for that matter, which non-D&D TSR product lines were being subsidized by D&D sales.

 

[Wik]

Well said, Keefe, well said.

 

[Dykstrav]

So, you're irked because Wotc learned from their mistakes and didn't try to shoehorn in concepts that didn't fit? Or am I misreading you?

Seriously? You are irked because WotC finally does the right thing? This calls for the rolling of eyes-icon, which we do not have here at ENworld...

Yeah, I am kinda irked about it. Please allow me to elaborate.

You see, when someone abandons a design concept, even when it's a poor design concept and it's the right thing to do in every way, that makes me think the original concept wasn't considered very carefully. The process of content design and implementation is called into question, even if unconsciously.

In other words, every time I hear someone say, "This is different, but it'll be cool, trust us," I remember every other time I heard it from them and think about how those previous incidents played out.

Just to be perfectly clear, I'm glad that Wizards of the Coast is changing things up. I just wish they'd done it sooner.

 

[Wik]

Just to be perfectly clear, I'm glad that Wizards of the Coast is changing things up. I just wish they'd done it sooner.

Ah, okay. No, that makes perfect sense... especially if you were an FR fan that saw your setting get messed up and then see someone "learn from their mistakes" in later products. Thanks for clearing it all up.

 

[Windjammer]

I mean, do you really think WotC would rerelease a setting that had failed?

Bill Slavicsek, creator of 2e DS and now head poncho of 4E says: "Yes, we so would!"


;D

 

[Nai_Calus]

Ah, okay. No, that makes perfect sense... especially if you were an FR fan that saw your setting get messed up and then see someone "learn from their mistakes" in later products. Thanks for clearing it all up.

Yeah that's pretty much exactly it for me as well.

They basically destroyed my setting to make it all 'fit'. 4E FR, to me, might as well just plain not be FR. It's PoL with different names and FR for people who didn't like FR(Who still don't like it, because it says FR on it). IMO of course but I'm not even remotely alone on this.

Now DS, a campaign setting I actively hate, is getting a decent treatment that isn't going to utterly destroy everything about it its fans like.

...Yeah, I'm pretty pissed. Great for you guys, but why oh why the hell couldn't they have gotten a clue earlier, before they ruined my setting? :<

 

[Jack99]

Yeah that's pretty much exactly it for me as well.

They basically destroyed my setting to make it all 'fit'. 4E FR, to me, might as well just plain not be FR. It's PoL with different names and FR for people who didn't like FR(Who still don't like it, because it says FR on it). IMO of course but I'm not even remotely alone on this.

Now DS, a campaign setting I actively hate, is getting a decent treatment that isn't going to utterly destroy everything about it its fans like.

...Yeah, I'm pretty pissed. Great for you guys, but why oh why the hell couldn't they have gotten a clue earlier, before they ruined my setting? :<

Did Mearls' ninjas come and take your FR books from previous editions? If not, then how the hell did they ruin *your* setting?

 

[vagabundo]

Yeah that's pretty much exactly it for me as well.

They basically destroyed my setting to make it all 'fit'. 4E FR, to me, might as well just plain not be FR. It's PoL with different names and FR for people who didn't like FR(Who still don't like it, because it says FR on it). IMO of course but I'm not even remotely alone on this.

Now DS, a campaign setting I actively hate, is getting a decent treatment that isn't going to utterly destroy everything about it its fans like.

...Yeah, I'm pretty pissed. Great for you guys, but why oh why the hell couldn't they have gotten a clue earlier, before they ruined my setting? :<

I'm running 4e FR pre-spellplague and it is pretty easy, so WotC didn't really destroy anything, they just added another period to play in. I'm running Thunderspire in the Thunder Peaks.