Logic behind sales of "Expedition to Castle Greyhawk"?

[Razz]

BTW, speaking of "fractured" audiences, there WAS a third audience base in 3E. Let's not all forget about the Oriental Adventures fiasco. Silly move to base it on Rokugan, I'd say.

And what kind of support do we see for Oriental Adventures from WotC?

Zero.

What were the sales on that book? Quite huge, last I heard.

So another question of mine would be this:

It's obvious OA was based on Rokugan only cause they planned on going d20 and it was the only new, fresh setting to base OA on. However, that bombed big time. The question is, why won't you guys release an Oriental Adventures 2, so to speak, this time grounding it into an Asian setting that should've been used from the start---KARA-TUR.

Sure, Kara-Tur is now FR based. But I'm sure it can be kept as FR-light as possible while still presenting itself as an OA-generic setting. In fact, Kara-Tur was originally meant to be just that (and eventually placed into GH before it suddenly was dropped into FR). Even when it was based in FR, the material was very "Faerun-light". Heck, leave a chapter at the end of such a book just for FR, so that those purchasing the book will enjoy it dropped in any world of theirs while the FR folks get to keep it in FR.

Just more thoughts I'd share.

 

[Razz]

FR is already on a hiatus. They haven't published a FR sourcebook in almost a year now (since Dragons of Faerûn), and we haven't had a regional sourcebook in two years (Since CoS: Waterdeep). The only thing even remotely resembling a FR sourcebook in the near future is the timeline thingy, which is a variant of the timeline that's been available online FOR FREE for years now. In other words, if you don't buy pre-fab adventures (and I don't) or novels (and I don't), FR is a dead setting.

My feelings exactly!

One FR super-adventure is enough, but THREE in one year? And then a "coffee-table" book? What gives? There's so much to cover in Forgotten Realms, I just wish it will get covered one day...heck, before I die of old age at least. I felt really gipped all of 2007 and the last few months of 2006 (since Dragons of Faerun in fact) of FR products.

And throwing in 2-4 pages of lore in an adventure book does not a FR sourcebook make. I am very appalled, in fact, by the statements on the back of the Anauroch: Empire of Shade book coming out in November. That it's both an adventure AND regional info on Anauroch? In 160 pages? Wow. So sad what Forgotten Realms is turning into now.

(Personally, if the 3E FR books simply were written as the old 2E FR books did [tons of lore, smaller font], there wouldn't be such outcries. But we all know about the fiasco with Silver Marches and the enigmatic "bean-counters" Sean K. Reynolds alluded us to screwed us over with that)

The Greyhawk material in Dragon and Dungeon is phenomenally popular, and not just with 35-year-old grognards. Yes, a lot of the appeal is tied up in it being the "first" campaign setting, but you should discount that. Even people who were not alive when it first came out find it compelling for that reason.

The idea that no new gamers are interested in Greyhawk is simply wrong. And I've got sales numbers to prove it. Soon, I suspect, Scott will too.

--Erik

One question, how many of these people actually use the material in Dragon/Dungeon because it's Greyhawk compared to those who just adapt the material to their own games or to FR and Eberron?

All the GH material in Dungeon, for example, I adapt for my Realms game. Heck, the adventure paths I use the FR conversions for. That doesn't mean I like GH. It means I like FR enough to swip GH material to throw into it.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I'm confident that an Expanded Oriental Adventures book will hit the streets right after the Expanded Epic Level Handbook arrives.

 

[Razz]

Second you bring up a good point that there may be too much similarity between certain settings to the point that at first blush most people could probably not tell you the difference between two "medieval settings" like FR and GH. So we may be forced with a tough choice either give fans two classic setting and potentially split the audience or re-format one of the settings to differentiate the two into more distinct settings.

Not really.

Forgotten Realms has a lot of non-medieval cultures and lands to warrant enough differentiation. Calimshan, Old Empires, Chult Peninsula, Lantan, Ulgarth, Semphar, Murghom, Rashemen, Moonshaes, the Great Glacier...the list goes on. Medieval areas are mostly where in Faerun? Waterdeep, Tethyr, Damara, Impiltur, and Cormyr? A handful compared to the numerous lands and cultures populating the Realms?

And even beyond Faerun, too, there's Al-Qadim, Maztica, Hordelands, and Kara-Tur.

So I really don't understand where people are getting the idea that FR and GH are "too similar" on a medieval-scope. I assume you're familiar enough with FR correct?

 

[Razz]

I'm confident that an Expanded Oriental Adventures book will hit the streets right after the Expanded Epic Level Handbook arrives.

If that ever happens. :\

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

So I really don't understand where people are getting the idea that FR and GH are "too similar" on a medieval-scope. I assume you're familair enough with FR correct?

Scale back on the assitude, please.

The medieval stuff is what's been depicted in FR art almost exclusively, except for a handful of selected novels and sourcebooks. The non-Faerun sections of the Forgotten Realms are less popular than the core region and have received only a little attention this time around.

At the present time, FR is a fantasy medieval setting as far as most consumers are concerned, much like Greyhawk mostly is. Yes, both settings have other stuff around the edges, but it's not the dominant flavor of the setting and unless one or both settings has a 90 degree turn on how it's developed for the rest of this edition -- "All Maztica, all the time!" -- they would be competing in the same space.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

If that ever happens. :\

'twas sarcasm. Both books desperately need the XPH treatment but seem unlikely to ever get them.

 

[Maggan]

So I really don't understand where people are getting the idea that FR and GH are "too similar" on a medieval-scope. I assume you're familiar enough with FR correct?

The problem though is that you need to communicate with gamers who are not familiar enough with neither FR or GH to easily pick up the differences. To them the settings share a similar veneer, or a similar medieval flavour.

When you look deeper, that might not be the case, but the battle for peoples attention will rarely give you that opportunity. So for many people, FR and GH are basically campaign settings in the same medieval tradition.

/M

 

[IanB]

Speaking for myself, the delve format is awesome, and IMO is probably the best thing WotC has done for D&D recently.

 

[Maggan]

No matter how much lip-service these 'brand managers' spout

He's got a name, you know ...

/M