One new setting a year?

[Aristotle]

I'm skipping ahead a little so forgive me if I'm repeating someone else's thoughts. I don't dilution of the brand has to be a concern if this is handled right. 2008 we get FR. 2009 we get Eberron. These are money makers and will likely spawn a product line for each (hopefully not one that is too aggressive), but nothing says a setting must have multiple books a year to be successful.

Put out one-off setting bibles that contain the material to run the setting, and the most setting specific rules. Support them with general rules in the DMG, PHB, and MM lines. Support them with the occasional Dragon article or Dungeon adventure, and when an idea that is big enough and good enough for a supplemental book turns up. Release it.

A glut of campaign settings didn't kill 2e. I don't care who says it. A glut of (often bad) product did. There was a mentality that every setting needed X number of books a year, and they didn't.

I don't currently collect campaign settings, as I don't want to invest the cash into whole new product lines... but if a single product line was launched that provided 1 setting a year and a promise of minimal campaign specific supplementation. I'd likely pick those up.

 

[Aeolius]

Sign me up for Greyhawk, as well. I have no interest in FR or Eberron.

 

[Hussar]

The problem with 1 setting a year is that a given setting (other than Eberron and FR) doesn't get any adventure support. A setting with no modules is just doomed. Plain and simple. Every setting that has come out that hasn't been backed by modules has faded and died.

So, yup, we get a book for New Setting Y and then New Setting Z, but, without any module support, that just means more work for DM's. The settings should be different enough that you can't just slap Dungeon adventures in them - that's what FR is for. So, now you've got your spiffy new setting and have to come up with entire campaigns, more or less from scratch.

Why bother? Homebrew is exactly the same amount of work and, it's cheaper.

I really, REALLY hope that WOTC supports every setting with at least 10-15 levels (preferably about 15 mini adventures) worth of adventures. Otherwise, it's a waste of time. Fans will be pissed off because they will change some detail or other in a beloved old setting, newcomers are stuck with a book that only adds to their workload.

Sorry, I believe that if I'm going to pay 40 bucks or so for a gaming book, it bloody well better make my workload less, not more.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

You can slap a Dungeon adventure into any setting. I can't imagine a new setting will be so different -- all characters are intelligent waveforms differentiated by their frequency! -- that you can't do that.

 

[Spinachcat]

I would be very happy with one new setting per year BUT I would like the setting to be contained in one book.

Settings did not kill 2e. There was no brand dilution. If TSR only put out FR, they would have lost big dollars from me and many others who do not enjoy FR. Instead, they gave us Dark Sun and Planescape and others which earned dollars from people who would have never bought a FR product. TSR died because TSR was mismanaged by the trio of greed, arrogance and ignorance. WotC got TSR because TSR committed business suicide.

Personally, I find FR and Eberron to be lame candylands in comparison to evocative and dynamic settings like Scarred Lands, Iron Kingdoms and Midnight which all came from non-WotC sources. It would be great to see WotC do something daring like DS or PS again.

If they do revisit any old settings, I would love to see a full re-imagining of Spelljammer that loses the goofy stuff and emphasizes the dangerous space fantasy and swashbuckling elements.

 

[PeterWeller]

The problem with 1 setting a year is that a given setting (other than Eberron and FR) doesn't get any adventure support. A setting with no modules is just doomed. Plain and simple. Every setting that has come out that hasn't been backed by modules has faded and died.

So, yup, we get a book for New Setting Y and then New Setting Z, but, without any module support, that just means more work for DM's. The settings should be different enough that you can't just slap Dungeon adventures in them - that's what FR is for. So, now you've got your spiffy new setting and have to come up with entire campaigns, more or less from scratch.

Why bother? Homebrew is exactly the same amount of work and, it's cheaper.

I really, REALLY hope that WOTC supports every setting with at least 10-15 levels (preferably about 15 mini adventures) worth of adventures. Otherwise, it's a waste of time. Fans will be pissed off because they will change some detail or other in a beloved old setting, newcomers are stuck with a book that only adds to their workload.

Sorry, I believe that if I'm going to pay 40 bucks or so for a gaming book, it bloody well better make my workload less, not more.

The DI and Dungeon give them the ability to support any new setting with a complete run of adventures, while not flooding the bookshelves with tons of modules that don't sell very well.

Also, I don't see why you think a setting book without adventure support makes your work load greater than setting up a homebrew. Either way, you're going to have to write adventures, and if you go with a homebrew, you're also going to have to write setting. If you buy a setting book, you no longer have to write setting; now, you just have to write adventures. How does that increase your workload?

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I think Spelljammer screams out for the single sourcebook treatment, combining ship rules, sample worlds, races, new spells and monsters. The 3E environment sourcebooks would be a good model for how I'd do it, in fact.

 

[Shortman McLeod]

If one dies a hideous death then it was just a single book anyway.

Ghostwalk, anyone?

 

[The Little Raven]

There was no brand dilution.

Read Ryan Dancey's account of the acquisition of TSR and his discussion of warehouses full of returned and unsold products from various campaign settings. It's pretty clear that attempting to support so many campaign settings diluted sales, especially among ones that were all just Western Fantasy carbon copies, as well as costing them huge amounts of money in printing and production (since they made more than just paperback books).

If TSR only put out FR, they would have lost big dollars from me and many others who do not enjoy FR.

They wouldn't have lost big dollars, because they wouldn't have spent so much on campaign settings that never made them any money. Again, read Dancey's account of the TSR acquisition, and note the part where he said that many of their products weren't even capable of breaking even (thus, they were just making new products that cost them money, even if they sold every copy).

If Dark Sun, Planescape, or any of those others was as popular as you seem to think, then they'd have gotten licensed during 3e like Ravenloft and Dragonlance did. They didn't, because nobody in the position to do so thought they were worth the cost.

TSR died because TSR was mismanaged by the trio of greed, arrogance and ignorance. WotC got TSR because TSR committed business suicide.

Product glut is a sign of just attempting to make money, instead of producing a reasonable amount of quality products.

It would be great to see WotC do something daring like DS or PS again.

If there was a viable market for them, they would. However, selling a redone version of an old campaign setting that wasn't very popular is not something on their agenda, unless they can see a huge amount of support in the form of sales, not forum posts.

If they do revisit any old settings, I would love to see a full re-imagining of Spelljammer that loses the goofy stuff and emphasizes the dangerous space fantasy and swashbuckling elements.

Andy Collin's Shadow of the Spider Moon is a great move in that direction.

 

[Zogmo]

As someone already said, not all settings are these grand huge things like FR and EB. Many settings could be done with one shot, high page count, single print books. IMHO that would be the way to pull this off with minimal impact. If one does really well then WotC or a third party may want to support it further, if one dies a hideous death then it was just a single book anyway. They could introduce the classics, the other contest finalists, and totally new concepts not yet even tried and see how they do.

This would be really, really awesome.

Thinking about the grand possibilities from all of the updated campaign settings...it's very exciting.

Hello Gamma World!