Is Ghostwalk any good?

[Iron_Chef]

So are you actually argueing against WotC doing something different as apposed to another class/race/deity/equipment/prc/feat/magic/forgotten realms book?

Yes, when the chosen subject is of such marginal interest to most gamers, I am definitely saying that they shouldn't do it. That's what third party publishers are for.

In any event, WoTC should not be wasting their time on such questionable minor projects, but concentrating on big projects that appeal to a broader audience.

In the first place, WoTC is not creative or talented enough with their current stable of post-layoff writers/designers to put out anything excessively creative, nor would corporate dictates allow them to produce anything remarkably "edgy" (BoVD being a prime example of what an evil book shouldn't be). So, WoTC couldn't do it, even if they wanted to, IMO.

 

[FungiMuncher]

In my home brew campaign, I put some effort into the existence of spirits. Before, the only things I could hook on to rules wise were the MM ghosts. Now with this book, I have quite a bit more to help me develop them. The ideas are sound, and cover a wide range possibilities. No, I won't be using the setting materials, or some of the base assumptions of how ghosts exist. However, I am glad that this book has filled in a lot of those gaps and blocks to my own efforts.

Would I play in a campaign set in Manifest? Yes, eagerly! It's that cool.

FM

 

[Pramas]

Frankly, I'm shocked WoTC would release a niche product like Ghostwalk; it should have been patently obvious from the start that it would appeal to such a narrow margin of the RPG market as to be negligible. It just doesn't make financial sense for WoTC to release something like this. It screams "third party" publisher, if anyone were to ever release anything like this at all. If WoTC was going to do something marginal like this, I can think of dozens of ideas I'd rather see than Ghostwalk. I'd much rather see a WoTC Vampire book than Ghostwalk, for example. More people would rather play vampires than ghosts, IMNSHO.

Ironically, we pitched for Ghostwalk, but WotC decided to do it themselves.

You'll be happy to know that we do, in fact, have a vampire book coming out this month, Fang & Fury: A Guidebook to Vampires. We should have advanced copies at Origins, and it'll be in stores shortly thereafter. You can find more details here:

http://www.greenronin.com/cgi-bin/product.cgi?prodid=1105

 

[Olive]

Yes, when the chosen subject is of such marginal interest to most gamers, I am definitely saying that they shouldn't do it. That's what third party publishers are for.

Why? Shouldn't WotC feel free to publish what ever they want? Why do you care?

In any event, WoTC should not be wasting their time on such questionable minor projects, but concentrating on big projects that appeal to a broader audience.

Again, surely WotC should be publishing anything they want to publish. This idea that WotC has a duty to the consumer to only publish extremely mainstream books is bizarre IMO.

In the first place, WoTC is not creative or talented enough with their current stable of post-layoff writers/designers to put out anything excessively creative, nor would corporate dictates allow them to produce anything remarkably "edgy" (BoVD being a prime example of what an evil book shouldn't be). So, WoTC couldn't do it, even if they wanted to, IMO.

A) neither of the authors of this book are currently working at WotC, so your pre-layoff comment is a bit wierd. I mean, Monte and sean were two of the main creative writers at WotC.

B) I'm pretty sure that Monta has said repetadly that the BoVD was the book he wanted to write. He also wanted to write the BoED, whic was turned downa t the time, and if any thing 'corporate sensibilities' wanted more gore etc. than Monte would have pout in (e.g. the rape publicity, which the book didn't cover or deal with). BoVD was also writen pre-layoffs, and lastly, tons of people love the BoVD (including me).

For the record, Ghostwalk looks pretty dull to me, but that's no reason for WotC to not publish it if they want to.

 

[MerricB]

You know, Ghostwalk looks like the perfect product to use one those occasions when everything goes wrong and there's a TPK.

This probably makes it the perfect add-on for the Return to the Temple of Elemental Evil...

Actually, this sounds pretty interesting. I wasn't going to get it, but TPKs aren't exactly unlikely in my campaigns.

Cheers!

 

[Goobermunch]

Yes, when the chosen subject is of such marginal interest to most gamers, I am definitely saying that they shouldn't do it. That's what third party publishers are for.

In any event, WoTC should not be wasting their time on such questionable minor projects, but concentrating on big projects that appeal to a broader audience.

In the first place, WoTC is not creative or talented enough with their current stable of post-layoff writers/designers to put out anything excessively creative, nor would corporate dictates allow them to produce anything remarkably "edgy" (BoVD being a prime example of what an evil book shouldn't be). So, WoTC couldn't do it, even if they wanted to, IMO.

Golly gosh, and gee whiz, it's a good thing WotC didn't try to produce this with the current crop of designers. Instead, it took advantage of its existing IP to put out a book that had been scrapped. This is pure windfall for them. All it has to do is make one dollar more than it made in production costs and they've turned a loss into a profit.

On to some of Iron_Chef's other comments. I won't bother to repeat them, I suspect good readers will see where my comments are directed.

Ghostwalk is nothing like Wraith. Ghostwalk is playable. It's fun. Wraith . . . well, I've tried to play twice. I'd say it falls into neither category. This, of course, means that using relative sales numbers for V:TM vs. W:TO to predict Ghostwalk's sucess isn't really a good metric.

Finally, I can fairly say, that in all the campaigns I've played in my years of playing D&D, only one had any ghosts or vampires. In point of fact it had one of each.

Possible spoilers below for people trying to integrate Ghostwalk into an existing cosmology.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
For those of you who want to use Ghostwalk but also want to maintain a set cosmology, I've come up with a bit of a hack. All it takes is a slight transition in how the True Afterlife is viewed. I'm treating it as a waystation on the way to the planes. A soul stays there for a time and then decides to move on to become a pettitioner. Becoming a pettitioner involves losing your memories and sense of self, so some souls stick around for longer than others.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
End Spoilers

I've got to say, Ghostwalk is one of the most intriguing settings I've seen. It's well thought out, balanced, and really cool to boot. It offers nearly every kind of campaign option out there, from hack and slash to political intrigue.

--G

 

[Iron_Chef]

Well, here's my rationale:

WoTC is not free to publish anything they want; they must answer to corporate masters at Hasbro for any faulty financial decisions made, and heads will roll (rightly so) should this happen. Since they must concern themselves with pleasing Hasbro's sales expectations (however reasonable or unreasonable they may be), they can't afford to do projects with only marginal returns on their investment. This means they must, if they are to continue to exist, focus on mainstream, big profit potential projects (like a new edition of the core rules every couple years). Ghostwalk is not going to be a big money-maker.

Monte and Sean are two of the most talented game designers out there; that doesn't mean I think everything they do smells like roses. Ghostwalk elicits nothing but yawns from me (to be polite), and raises the concern that the release of more marginal product like this could jeopardize WoTC's ability to please Hasbro, which could potentially have a disastrous negative impact on the future of D&D, at least in the short-term. So, I care what WoTC releases because I care about the future of the D&D brand, not what a vocal minority of consumers may want, esp. when they may not understand the harsh reality of corporate bottom-lines.

Seems strange to me that WoTC should choose to ****can the bulk of its most creative, talented designers instead of some of the questionable "talents" they chose to retain. Not that there still aren't a few good ones slaving away in the WoTC corporate mines, lol. But pretty much everybody who had anything to with shaping 3e is gone on even a managerial level. Perhaps WoTC felt that these people had too much name recognition and might prove problematic in demanding more money, more control, etc., whereas lesser knowns would be forced to (kow)tow the corporate line, so to speak. Just some random musings off the top of my head; they may have nothing to do with reality, but make for an interesting conspiracy theory.

Chris: I will definitely check out your Vampire book. Bottle Imp Games' Lord of the Night: Vampires book pretty much sucked, though they tried as hard as they could, I suppose. I'm sure Green Ronin will have a much cooler vampire book if the bulk of your past products are any indication.

 

[Illrein]

From what I've heard is that WotC shelved the idea, let it collect dust until third party publishers wanted to buy it, then decided that "Hey, you know, based on the bids we're getting from publishers like Green Ronin, we might be able to make some money off of this." But that's from what I've heard and I interpret for myself. What I find ironic is thet fact that Monte and Sean don't officially work for Wizards anymore and this book is seeing the light of day. Of course, one could interpret this as an attempt to lure people into thinking that WotC isn't the faceless, money-hungry, uncreative corporation that people relate it to be so the people who are even somewhat interested or impressed by Ghostwalk will set high standards for 3.5 (keep in mind I don't believe this; it's just an idea I had). Or maybe not? Who knows?
I am interested in Ghostwalk for many reasons. I think it is much more interesting than a vampire sourcebook, but that's me. Different things appeal to different people. No one should say that something shouldn't be published just because one person or even a large group of people say that it's bad.
It's a shame that the creative industry exists in this manner in a capitalist world.

 

[Iron_Chef]

It is indeed a tragedy that creativity must always be controlled by the financial resources available to the artist, and/or to the constraints of uncreative bean counters or censors aligned against them. How many great works have been lost due to money or censorship issues? There is no way of knowing, but we all feel the loss, just the same.

 

[jasamcarl]

Well, here's my rationale:

WoTC is not free to publish anything they want; they must answer to corporate masters at Hasbro for any faulty financial decisions made, and heads will roll (rightly so) should this happen. Since they must concern themselves with pleasing Hasbro's sales expectations (however reasonable or unreasonable they may be), they can't afford to do projects with only marginal returns on their investment. This means they must, if they are to continue to exist, focus on mainstream, big profit potential projects (like a new edition of the core rules every couple years). Ghostwalk is not going to be a big money-maker.

Monte and Sean are two of the most talented game designers out there; that doesn't mean I think everything they do smells like roses. Ghostwalk elicits nothing but yawns from me (to be polite), and raises the concern that the release of more marginal product like this could jeopardize WoTC's ability to please Hasbro, which could potentially have a disastrous negative impact on the future of D&D, at least in the short-term. So, I care what WoTC releases because I care about the future of the D&D brand, not what a vocal minority of consumers may want, esp. when they may not understand the harsh reality of corporate bottom-lines.

Seems strange to me that WoTC should choose to ****can the bulk of its most creative, talented designers instead of some of the questionable "talents" they chose to retain. Not that there still aren't a few good ones slaving away in the WoTC corporate mines, lol. But pretty much everybody who had anything to with shaping 3e is gone on even a managerial level. Perhaps WoTC felt that these people had too much name recognition and might prove problematic in demanding more money, more control, etc., whereas lesser knowns would be forced to (kow)tow the corporate line, so to speak. Just some random musings off the top of my head; they may have nothing to do with reality, but make for an interesting conspiracy theory.

Chris: I will definitely check out your Vampire book. Bottle Imp Games' Lord of the Night: Vampires book pretty much sucked, though they tried as hard as they could, I suppose. I'm sure Green Ronin will have a much cooler vampire book if the bulk of your past products are any indication.

Some pretty stupid random musings. By definition name recognition would not have caused wotc to lay of those designers, because, though they would expect more money by virtue of it, they would probably be worth it. Now if the designers thought they were worth more money than they actually are, then that could result in a parting, but that wouldn't be Wotcs fault, and i seriously doubt that is what happened.