Reports and News from D&D XP

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

From my point of view, Greyhawk fans are Greyhawk fans because the setting is left alone (and get angry when it's messed with). I find it difficult to believe there is a clamor for new products. Maybe they just don't like GH being ignored. Adventures are nice, ExtCG is good, what Dungeon is doing is great, not sure if we need much more than that.

A reprint of LGG seems long overdue, unless Greyhawk fans are eager to shut the door behind themselves.

 

[Ranger REG]

Seems like a logical approach WotC is taking.

In a cold, distant Vulcan sort of manner. I would never say to customers to "deal with it" as a company's rep.

I might as the US President to the DNP...

Who knows? They might tell FR fans to "deal with it" when there is a lack of product release for 4e. Or Eberron fans for that matter.

 

[Maggan]

In a cold, distant Vulcan sort of manner. I would never say to customers to "deal with it" as a company's rep.

We don't know that WotC said "deal with it". The post quoted said that it was his impression of what was said, and there are many ways to arrive at an impression of things like that. Not all ways include actually taking what what really said as the basis of departure.

/M

 

[mhacdebhandia]

I have no reason to disbelieve what Lisa Stevens said.

I would point out the X-factor that made it a no-brainer decision to support the Forgotten Realms over Greyhawk:

Novels.

Could Greyhawk have been as profitable if it had as many novels to its name as the Forgotten Realms? I don't see why not.

We'll never know what could have been, though, only what was. I'd suggest that Wizards of the Coast is probably quite content that Margaret Weis Productions is supporting their Dragonlance novel line with game products, too.

Consider also that the Forgotten Realms was licensed for multiple successful computer game lines.

 

[mhacdebhandia]

Personally, I'm pleased that Greyhawk is getting the support it does receive in Dragon and Dungeon, and I'm sorry for those Greyhawk fans who feel like it's a better idea to ignore that material because it's not in hardcover books from Wizards of the Coast: it's their loss and their mistake.

Hell, my preferred official setting is Eberron, but I still love back-to-the-roots article series like "Core Beliefs" and "Demonomicon", as well as the Greyhawk groundings of the adventure paths. It's fun stuff! What more can you ask?

In fact, "Demonomicon" is directly reponsible for my decision to use a large number of core elements as-is in my own homebrew campaign, rather than create my own material.

 

[Razz]

My biggest problem, quite frankly, is with the Eberron push.

I prefer Greyhawk; but have no overwhelming aversion to playing in the Realms. Past that, however, I'd go to third party sources like Kalamar, Scarred Lands, Arcanis, and other worlds--and then probably give up D&D altogether--before playing in Eberron.

I read the initial setting book, didn't like it, and didn't buy it. As far as I'm concerned, it's garbage, plain and simple.

Keep your steampunk and 'magic-punk' overtones OUT of my straightforward fantasy, if you please. No flying ships (I'm looking at you, too, Forgotten Realms 'Shining South'), no pseudo-robot machine men (I don't even use Iron Golems), etc., etc. In fact, even Greyhawk is too 'magic-y' for my taste. Grrrrrrrrrrrrr.......

Regards,
Darrell

Something tells me you'd like Iron Heroes, if you don't already have a campaign based there that is.

 

[Kid Charlemagne]

The question about Greyhawk isn't whether it would sell better than it does, or even if it would sell as well as FR - the question is would it add to the overall sales of WoTC products, and not cannibalize from other setting sales. I'm fond of Greyhawk, but I can understand not supporting it.

The Fantastic Locations line was pretty "blah" to me. I wanted more complex maps and involved things rather than what I saw.

 

[Pbartender]

A 1-4, C1, D 1-3, EX 1-2, G 1-3, I1, L1, Q1, S1, S2, S3, S4, WG4

If WotC went and made an "Expedition Line" updating all these old modules to 3.5. I, for one, would likely buy most, if not all, of them.

Not because they're Greyhawk material, but because they're adventures that I can toss into almost any campaign world (that's the great thing about Greyhawk material, I find) with very little work... And to a lesser degree, because the fond memories of running and playing these modules 20 years ago.

If the success my "IRON HEROES vs. [INSERT CONVERTED 20 YEAR OLD D&D MODULE]" series of events at recent Chicago Gamedays is any indication... More than few people would be clamoring to play them.

On the other hand, I've never once been the slitghest bit interested in purchasing any other setting specific 3.0/3.5 material that WotC has published to date... Most of it, especially the adventure modules, is simply too setting specific for me to be able to use in my games.



But then again, maybe I'm just twisting in the wind.

 

[bento]

From my point of view, Greyhawk fans are Greyhawk fans because the setting is left alone (and get angry when it's messed with). I find it difficult to believe there is a clamor for new products. Maybe they just don't like GH being ignored. Adventures are nice, ExtCG is good, what Dungeon is doing is great, not sure if we need much more than that.

FR fans obviously like the constant change and described minutia and that's what makes GH and FR different. They couldn't start doing that for GH, it would be redundant.

I agree - when I use the Greyhawk setting it's because I don't have to worry about shoehorning in all sorts of world events that neither I nor my players care about. We just want some place that it's easy to plop in some cool adventure sites to play the game WE want to play.

I've personally stayed away from FR because of the large amount of material that's out there and that there's been a ba-zillion novels written about it specificing every nook and cranny. The only time I played a FR game, I stuck to just playing my character's race and class, rather than get caught up with nations and other events that didn't effect the game one way or another.

My favorite settings are those that some work has been done to get the world going with places and power groups, but for the most part are left alone. It's up to me any my players to make things happen at the table, not wait for official word to come from the publisher via a new supplement, before we can have fun.

I like Greyhawk because to me it means generic fantasy = core books (pantheon & spells) + various supplements from Dragon & Dungeon magazines + our imagination for everything else.

Adding new adventures would be great. Adding new setting books would not.

 

[Umbran]

For all intents and purposes, a phrase like "Best Year Ever" is totally meaningless. Brand or product line(s)? Net or gross? Inflation adjusted or not? Counting from which year? How reliable are records of past years?

Oh, the statement has meaning. If we take the speaker to be knowledgable and honest, it says that by whatever measure WotC is using, the year was a success. One might extend that into expecting them to continue whatever strategy gave them that success.

It does not give us specific sales information, nor insight into whether we would consider the year a success. That just means we are not in a position to critique the statement - but that different than having no meaning.

And, of course, if we are not trusting the speaker to be knowledgeable and/or honest, whether teh statement has meaning is moot, as we shouldn't be listening to them at all.