News: Ravenloft back to WotC - and a FoS message

[Ranger REG]

For settings that have been dormant for a while introducing new stuff also introduces the risk of alienating the old players as well. One needs only to look at the Greyhawk and Dragonlance settings to see how true this can be.

Perhaps, but for some of us old-school Dragonlance gamers like me, I was content when Sovereign Press released the War of the Lance sourcebook. I didn't much like the direction DL was going after the Second Generation novel and later the conversion to SAGA rules. So, we're going to spin off to a different direction from post-WotL period.

As for GH, every fans has different ideas about that setting: some adhere to Gygax's version, others to Sargent's. Poor Erik Mona, trying to find the one middle path where it can be less critical from both sides. Add in WotC's lack of support (they'd rather focus on the new setting), and perhaps this setting is better off for the fan community (like Dark Sun).

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I think the current approach to Planescape, maybe turned up a notch or three, is the way to go.

No, you don't have to put out a book called "Planescape" again. But WotC can put out an "Planar Environments" series, with a book about the Upper Planes, the Lower Planes, the Planes of Chaos, the Planes of Law and the Inner Planes. (With transitive planes and demiplanes in their own book or something.) Load it up with Planescape prestige classes, monsters, spells, magic items and more detailed setting info. Set it after the final Planescape module, and just advance the timeline a little.

At that point, all that would be needed would be a Ghostwalk-style sourcebook about Sigil loaded with crunch and setting detail.

The same model would work well with Zakhara and plenty of other defunct settings. Ravenloft monsters, spells, and horror rules (assuming Heroes of Horror doesn't serve as the final modern answer on all that) would be easy to see in another horror sourcebook. Birthright's specialized domain rules cry out to be revisited in the modern system, and its old world could be provided as a sample setting in the same way that Oriental Adventures had an example setting. As wacky as it is in some people's view, Spelljammer could also work well with this one-book treatment, just call it "Heroes of Magical Space" or something.

The only ones that would have a hard time coming back this way are settings with zero tie-in to other content. Mystara/Hollow World, alas, is probably dead outside of Hackmaster and Blackmoor for the time being.

 

[wingsandsword]

Because like you said, WotC doesn't want to fragment the market. Sure it is a shame to see many of these settings, some of which had great ideas, fade into obscurity, but there's also the fact that too many settings led to the demise of TSR.

WotC is already fragmenting their market with the twin Realms and Eberron lines. The "not supporting multiple lines" bit also came from Ryan Dancey's famous open letter about the dawn of 3rd Edition, that same email also said that WotC was going to pour a fortune into the RPGA to turn it into a huge gamer support and networking system (not quite), and that Ravenloft was discontinued because it was overshadowed by White Wolf (which got the license, and now they don't, leading to this whole thread).

I for one won't touch a book labelled Eberron, spellpunk, banally-common-magic, created-by-focus-group feel, a whole new core class devoted to cranking out magic items (which D&D has too many of already), non-genre robot PC's (without ECL!), cities of skyscrapers with magical railroads and the like. I know players who are just the same way with Forgotten Realms, seeing it as nothing but overpowered books with insanely powerful NPC's who steal the spotlight from PC's and they buy everything D&D except the Realms. Other players I know refuse to buy anything from any WotC setting, but buy all the "Generic" books like Completes and Bo?D's.

The fans of older settings know that one way or the other they are never going to get full support, but one hardcover. Why did Wizards make Ghostwalk, a setting book for a one-shot that they didn't intend to revisit, or publish the Dragonlance setting book under their banner while letting Soveriegn Press (look carefully, the DLCS was published by WotC, although it was written by SP) if they didn't want to have multiple lines. They haven't been entirely consistent on this "not splitting the market" thing.

It also has nothing apparently to do with competition for D&D. Some companies have tried to get the license for Dark*Matter to do a d20 Modern version, only to be strongly rebuffed by WotC, they're not licensing out even their non D&D settings. It's hardly about splitting their D&D market in that case.

Manual of the Planes was hardly anything for Planescape fans. There was almost nothing new in there to a PS fan, and most of it's material was a rehash of the old 1e MotP. After I bought it. We had a rich, detailed planar environment which was a setting unto itself, and it was replaced with a generic Hardcover of the Month retreading 1e material with a few token mentions of PS specific things.

Making almost a dozen product lines isn't what killed TSR, it's trying to support them all simultaneously. When TSR was in one month producing books for Planescape, Forgotten Realms, Dark Sun, Birthright and Spelljammer, not to mention maybe a generic sourcebook then it was dividing the market. Right now, it's generic/core suppliments, Eberron and Forgotten Realms.

Even when they have a chance to revisit an old setting, they denied it in favor of yet another setting. Kara Tur was the traditional eastern-themed D&D setting, but when the 3e Oriental Adventures came out, we got Rokugan instead as the default setting, with a heavily supported 3rd party Rokugan line too. Now for Eastern-style D&D among gamers, you have those who prefer Rokugan and those who prefer Kara Tur, they've split an already split market.

It's not a sensible marketing decision when they can squirt out "Weapons of Legacy" which will only appeal to a limited chunk of players, when they have properties gathering dust which are guaranteed to sell big (at least for the first book) from old fans. Doing one large hardcover setting book for the most popular settings is a way to cut the risk of failure, while cashing in on the large amount of nostalgia they have in certain quarters. A Planescape or Dark-Sun one-book Campaign Setting would certainly sell as much as the latest generic miscellaneous splatbook (given the vehement enthusiasm in some quarters for Planescape or Dark Sun, there's got to be at least as much support for it as Races of Destiny or Weapons of Legacy). Yes, there are people who will avoid a single hardcover like the plague, but there are also people who avoid the Environment, or the Racial, or other books that come out.

 

[Ranger REG]

The fans of older settings know that one way or the other they are never going to get full support, but one hardcover. Why did Wizards make Ghostwalk, a setting book for a one-shot that they didn't intend to revisit,

It was SKR's last work for WotC before he was let go earlier than expected. I must admit that like you and your aversion to Eberron, I do not find use for it in my game, so I'm not going to buy it just to collect dust at home.

or publish the Dragonlance setting book under their banner while letting Soveriegn Press (look carefully, the DLCS was published by WotC, although it was written by SP) if they didn't want to have multiple lines.

Dragonlance is a popular setting, plus Margaret Weis & Sovereign Press wanted to revive and support it. WotC work out the agreement that they profit from the sale of the main campaign setting book (essential for DL gamers, if not PHB owners), while Sovereign Press support the line. WotC could have done that with both Ravenloft and Gamma World but for some reason "missed the opportunity" during negotiation (or the third party is adamant on doing it all themselves or not at all).

They haven't been entirely consistent on this "not splitting the market" thing.

Perhaps, but so far they haven't flooded the market either. I'd rather WotC focus their resources (human and budget) on a few lines, and let others willing to get the license from WotC do the rest, so they can simply kick back and just wait for their royalty share.

It also has nothing apparently to do with competition for D&D. Some companies have tried to get the license for Dark*Matter to do a d20 Modern version, only to be strongly rebuffed by WotC, they're not licensing out even their non D&D settings. It's hardly about splitting their D&D market in that case.

I dunno. I have heard rumors last year that WotC was shopping for someone to take the Dark Sun license. Of course, they're not going to give it to the first company who show up with the money. Then again, they did gambled with Sword & Sorcery Studio with the Gamma World license and ... well, the first GW product from them isn't exactly impressive.

Even when they have a chance to revisit an old setting, they denied it in favor of yet another setting. Kara Tur was the traditional eastern-themed D&D setting, but when the 3e Oriental Adventures came out, we got Rokugan instead as the default setting, with a heavily supported 3rd party Rokugan line too. Now for Eastern-style D&D among gamers, you have those who prefer Rokugan and those who prefer Kara Tur, they've split an already split market.

Yeah, I've been scratching my head as to why WotC did not compete with AEG, other than the fact that prior to the release of OA WotC owned both L5R and Kara-Tur IPs.

And you figured that as soon as WotC sold the L5R IP (I mean they relinquish all trademark ownership) to AEG, they didn't come out with a Kara-Tur supplement compatible to the new OA (unless they're made a grave mistake in the sales agreement like promising not to compete with OA/Rokugan for X amount of years).

 

[Steel_Wind]

Yanno, the only thing of any consequence I have ever heard WotC say about the reason multiple campaign settings were a bad idea is that the "many buckets theory" was too expensive to deploy.

Many buckets theory: it's raining money, so get out as many buckets as you can to catch it;

vs.

Big-Ass Bucket Theory: It will never rain harder. Too many buckets are too costly to produce. Concentrate on making a few big-ass buckets instead. Same rain - cheaper cost of sales - (and our fans won't hate one another).

The thing is - there is only so much crunch you can sell. Yeah we can take a bit more - but not a lot more. I expect we are going to get adventures again by default: there are fewer alternatives.

Seems to me the thing WotC should do is the thing Paizo is doing with Age of Worms and everything esle they do for the most part : Go Generic.

Yup. Large yellow cover with big black bold title: "Adventure".

Don't do campaign specific adventures at all. Not fot FR. Not for Eberon. "Just say no". Keep em generic and back them all up online with extensive conversion notes.

Don't tell me online conversion notes are "too expensive". That's crap. Don't tell me most of their users aren't online - that's crap too. Most of them may not visit WotC's website regularly or be "online gamers" - Ok I'll give you that. But if they are gamers in the industrialized world - the vast majority most will have online access of some kind if conversion notes are remotely important to them.

Just be fastidious in making the adventures generic - convert where necessary and make Big-Ass Adventure Buckets with cool maps.

They'll sell.

 

[Troll Hunter]

It's not a sensible marketing decision when they can squirt out "Weapons of Legacy" which will only appeal to a limited chunk of players, when they have properties gathering dust which are guaranteed to sell big (at least for the first book) from old fans. Doing one large hardcover setting book for the most popular settings is a way to cut the risk of failure, while cashing in on the large amount of nostalgia they have in certain quarters. A Planescape or Dark-Sun one-book Campaign Setting would certainly sell as much as the latest generic miscellaneous splatbook (given the vehement enthusiasm in some quarters for Planescape or Dark Sun, there's got to be at least as much support for it as Races of Destiny or Weapons of Legacy). Yes, there are people who will avoid a single hardcover like the plague, but there are also people who avoid the Environment, or the Racial, or other books that come out.

Hmm, Per Charles Ryan (RPG Category Manager for D&D and D20) comments on the WOTC General Board, they disagree with you there. Remember they have the actual sales numbers from TSR and their own records from the transition period from AD&D to 3.0 on the last of those campaign products you want so badly.

Unfortunately even a product like Greyhawk (which in my opinion would have been a greater seller than Ravenloft, Planescape, Dark Sun, Gamma World and Oriental Adventures) would only get sales in the thousands or at best in the tens of thousands is not worth developing. Why? Because per WOTC the generic books you look down upon sell in the hundreds of thousands.

So on your limited development budget do you create a product that sells to thousands - maybe tens of thousands or to a product that sells to hundreds of thousands?

Mind you that even epic and psionics books are considered average to poor sellers. Check out his comments in the [Woof] marked threads on WOTC general board (I believe MerricB posted a link on these boards in another thread) on epic and psionic content. You can also see and read it within the commentary at the GENCON seminar.

Also as many people like to bluntly state it, WOTC is a “money-grubbing” profit-focused business, you place your limited development dollars that give you the best returns – the products that the greatest number of people will buy. The products they develop and sell make their stock holders and investors happy and the largest segment of the gaming markets get products they like. The niche players will have to wait (epic and psionic) or create their own for everyone else.

FWIW I did buy Ravenloft 3.0 and I am sorry but I thought it was horrible. IMO the fluff was poorly written and there was a real lack of crunch. I never bought any more products in that line again. It sits on my bookcase gathering dust next to Midnight 3.0 and too many other products I should have never bought.

 

[Vocenoctum]

From: http://www.gamingreport.com/article.php?sid=18299&mode=thread&order=0
"In the past, the TSR folks discovered that the more campaign settings you support at any one time, you split your audience into tiny fractious groups who hate each other. We want to preserve what we managed to create and sustain in 3rd edition."

I think another part of the "split your market" thing that a lot of folks miss is how "loyal" fans of any given line, quite often became exclusive to that line, getting quite mean spirited to releases for "other" lines that were stealing "their" spotlight.

Take Heroes of Horror for example. As a generic horror book, it will sell a lot more than as a Ravenloft Horror book, yet how many Ravenloft fans think Ravenloft DESERVES to replace it?

I've also seen a bit of FR vs Eberron stuff on the boards. People dismiss the other line because it's not "their setting".

It made sense to make a new setting (Eberron) because they wanted something setup around the 3e mechanics. They didn't want to argue about how they captured or missed the feel of Planescape, Ravenloft, Greyhawk, Spelljammer, Al Qadim, Birthright, Mystara or any other setting that may have been produced at some point in time. Those settings all come with built in fans, but they also come with built in detractors and folks that will never pick them up because of past experiences.

Folks that say fan's would be happy with a one-shot, must be ignoring the Dragon/Dungeon Dark Sun package. It was very well done, and diehard fans did nothing but complain. Folks that didn't like DS complained about it taking up "their" magazine space.

So, Eberron was a fresh shot, to maybe get folks to judge it on it's own merit, instead of some campaign they played in ages ago where the DM was a jerk. (I've had players decline DL and RL for exactly that reason, a bad DM abused the setting.)

 

[Joël of the FoS]

Hey thanks Vocenoctum for this useful info. Hopefully, it will mean more space for fan made material if they do not plan on making new Ravenloft books?

Joël

 

[Vocenoctum]

There's always:
"Q: Rights to Ravenloft and Gamma World reverted to WOTC this week, are going to do anything with them?
A: not right away, we're talking about it."

From the same page, but I wouldn't hold my breath for new products.

 

[MavrickWeirdo]

Paizo (Dragon mag/Dungeon Mag) seems to be filling in some of the gaps

Issue 315 was a campaign classics theme - tried to do article for every campaign settings TSR had done. Frequent letter/message boards request is about canceled campaign settings. Now the answer is every Jan. will do campaign classics (not going to be as exhaustive/pervasive as issue 315 was.) In upcoming Jan. issue have Spelljammer, Planescape, and Ravenloft all in the works.

full article