Reports and News from D&D XP

[MerricB]

So Merric, no news of 4e at D&D XP?

Actually: Yes, there was.

The news was "still a long way off" and "we have a lot of 3.5e products in 2008".

It's very important news: 2009 looks like the earliest date for 4e (although it could still be further away than that, and plans may change).

That Wizards are still talking about "best ever years" is incredible. 2006 wasn't an obvious year for great products - the much maligned Complete Psionic is the only book in that series that was produced - but apparently some did very well indeed. Of course, it did benefit from the very strong Player's Handbook II.

I think it was Mike Mearls who said that the Book of Nine Swords was surprisingly successful, and they had copped a lot of flak for the tribal format in Monster Manual IV...

Cheers!

 

[Vocenoctum]

I personally wouldn't mind a "Greyhawk Campaign Setting" book. I came in at the tail end of 1e, where people were heavily into house settings and/or Forgotten Realms. I know nothing of Greyhawk, the castle, the Council, or the War beyond their existence.

Dungeon's GH material would be helped by hosting a basic timeline and background story. Heck, there might be already PDF but I've never heard of it or seen it pushed in the couple of Dungeons I own.

I liked the Living Greyhawk Gaz, but the little Gaz was bleh. I think releasing a Greyhawk book a year wouldn't hurt things very much, but since they mix GH stuff into the Core material, not sure how it'd affect things.

 

[Pbartender]

In the interests of threadjacking ( ), what program do you use to make your maps Pbartender?

Photoshop or Inkscape along with the MapMaker PLUS font/image package, and any other good bits that I can scrounge online.

 

[CaptainChaos]

Actually: Yes, there was.

The news was "still a long way off" and "we have a lot of 3.5e products in 2008".

It's very important news: 2009 looks like the earliest date for 4e (although it could still be further away than that, and plans may change).

Not necessarily. 3.5 products in 2008 does not preclude a 2008 launch for 4th edition. They could easily put some books out in the first quarter and then launch 4E at GenCon 6 months later.

 

[grodog]

Actually: Yes, there was. The news was "still a long way off" and "we have a lot of 3.5e products in 2008". It's very important news: 2009 looks like the earliest date for 4e (although it could still be further away than that, and plans may change).

Ah, I'd missed that before. Thanks

 

[Darrell]

Photoshop or Inkscape along with the MapMaker PLUS font/image package, and any other good bits that I can scrounge online.

[threadjack]

By the by, Pbartender, did you ever do any more to that 'Dragonclaw Barony' map of mine you were working on? If you'd like a list of place names and so forth, I can send it to ya. I really like your map work.

[/threadjack]


With regard to the ongoing (and ongoing...and ongoing...) discussion, I'm not asking for a buttload of Greyhawk support from Wizards. I'm in total agreement with the posters who say that Greyhawk works best when WotC leaves it alone. There's really only one product I'm personally clamoring for, and hopefully we'll see it...if Expedition to the Ruins of Greyhawk does well: a well-done hardcover setting book for Greyhawk. Basic setting information and maybe a chapter on the City of Greyhawk and its environs.

Regards,
Darrell

 

[mhacdebhandia]

Would you rather Eberron be supported just through magazine articles and expect no future Eberron game product released from here on out?

You're asking the wrong question. The choice is actually between supporting Greyhawk in whatever form its owners believe it's viable to publish, or no Greyhawk materials being published at all.

I stand by what I said: If you like Greyhawk, but turn your nose up at the Living Greyhawk material and the great work being published in Dragon and Dungeon solely because it isn't in an official Wizards of the Coast hardcover as you believe it deserves to be, you're shooting yourself in the foot. Not only are you not taking advantage of what's already on offer, you're actively taking away from the chance that Greyhawk will, in the future, be seen as a viable "full support" setting, by not contributing to sales and interest right now.

For God's sake, message board petitions and continuous plaintive demands for Greyhawk material will not make an iota of difference to Greyhawk's chances of full-fledged support, not compared to actually showing you're interested in Greyhawk by snatching up what's already on offer from Paizo right now. You don't think that, if Paizo could demonstrate that Greyhawk adventures and articles cause their sales to jump, Wizards of the Coast wouldn't look more favourably on future efforts to publish Greyhawk material - or take over the job themselves? Give me a bloody break.

(To answer your misguided question directly: It would not be ideal for me if Eberron support material were only to be found in Dragon and Dungeon, but I absolutely would not whine and complain that it wasn't getting the attention I thought it deserved like some Greyhawk fans do.)

 

[mhacdebhandia]

The whole campaign was based around conversions of old classic D&D modules that I had been fond of in my youth, and most of my players had never heard of. The locales and their names, though relating the specific places in the Greyhawk world, were "generic" enough that I could shuffle them around and piece them back together as a "minisetting" unto themselves.

That's really very cool.

But is it truly Greyhawk?

Of course, the answer doesn't really matter, because what really matters is how enjoyable the games you played in that setting were.

On the other hand, where some people see the Greyhawk "classic D&D" experience as generic and malleable to any purpose, I see the setting as absolutely as specific as any other - to me, the classic D&D ideas about elves, dwarves, demons, gods, dungeons, and everything else aren't generic at all. They're very specific to D&D and D&D's inspirations . . .

But then, I don't really think there's any such thing as "generic fantasy". Maybe it's because I dislike the traditional Tolkienesque assumptions so much, but I find it hard to call it generic when to me it has a very specific, distasteful flavour.

(I hasten to add: a Hell of a lot of the specific Greyhawk flavour is really cool. "Demonomicon" is among my favourite Dragon features, and I really enjoy "Core Beliefs" even if I doubt I'd use those deities in any game.)

 

[mhacdebhandia]

Not to be snarky but... do we have any hard evidence for this type of assumption?

I base my assumptions on this principle: cui bono?

Who benefits from Wizards of the Coast's continuing to release Eberron supplements if it is an unsuccessful brand? Likewise, if Third Edition D&D were doing poorly, who would benefit from the continued supply of new sourcebooks that's been forecast into 2008?

Wizards of the Coast certainly doesn't benefit if sales of Eberron books are lackluster compared to other books they could be producing with the same resources. Likewise, if sales of Third Edition supplements dip below a certain level without reasonable hope of recovery, that would be the signal for Fourth Edition to ramp up and roll out.

Since Wizards of the Coast is a business and not in the habit of providing charity to gamers starved for information on their favourite settings, we can assume that the continued supply of Eberron supplements and Third Edition material is of benefit to them.

This is, of course, simplistic - but there's a reason previous settings were cancelled, and in the vast majority of cases the reason was the same: poor sales.

I think anyone who suggests that Wizards of the Coast continues to support Eberron because it would "look bad" if they gave up on the setting they hyped so much, and that this is the only real reason why they continue to support the setting, is simply deluding themselves. Public perception simply doesn't matter anywhere near as much as does profit.

 

[mhacdebhandia]

from hearsay(not claiming it's in anyway "fact" DDO was a dissapointment to both Eberron fans and MMORPG'ers.

While I am an Eberron fan who tried and disliked D&D Online: Stormreach, the fact is that Wizards of the Coast has absolutely no control whatsoever over any of the decisions made by Turbine that contributed to the quality of the game (or lack thereof).

I wish they had - perhaps the game wouldn't have made so many offences against Eberron setting canon if they had - but the fact remains that they didn't.