Rules Reprints And Setting Proliferation

[Kaodi]

Forked from: http://www.enworld.org/forum/general-rpg-discussion/329515-you-part-lost-generation-rpg-gamers.html

In my opinion, his blog post missed the crucial point for why 2E hasn't had an explosion of nostalgia-fueled popularity and retro-clones (though some commenters did point it out): 2E is about the settings, not the mechanics.

2E was the era of Dark Sun, Planescape, and Birthright. It's when Ravenloft became its own campaign, and the Forgotten Realms took off like a rocket. It was when we had wild experimentation like Jakandor and Red Steel.

None of these are things that you can retro-clone. Indeed, there's an undercurrent of "I can port this to whatever rules I like most now" in a lot of discussions about those old settings, fueled by various degrees of conversions to 3E and 4E that have appeared in official and unofficial channels.

The "lost" generation of gamers isn't lost because they're being ignored; they're "lost" because they don't have much stake in the edition wars, since for them the edition is a minor concern.

This got me thinking a bit: If Wizards of the Coast has embraced proliferation of multiple editions of D&D, does this mean that we could be headed for a new age of experimentation in D&D settings (or even just a parallel reprinting of old ones, sans rules)?

I think that could be quite interesting. A little dangerous, perhaps, but interesting. We have had, what, two and a half new settings since the Dawn of 3e (Ghostwalk being the half)? Could be time to let those creative juices flow again.

The danger, of course, comes from whether it is possible to have too many settings on the market. But that was the same danger of reprinting old rules, and the logic seems to have fallen away there. As well, though we know that the glut of material turned out to be hazardous for TSR back in the day, it would be a mistake to assume that the dynamics of saturation are the same in this day and age. The maturity of the Internet now compared to then being a major factor I think.

While it may be difficult to replicate the 2E era of settings, I would certainly like to see them given a chance to thrive once more.

 

[Cor Azer]

Entirely depends on how much support each setting gets.

Releasing one book per setting isn't an issue, so long as material in other supplements is flexible enough to fit in multiple (but perhaps not all) existing settings.

 

[Dice4Hire]

Actually, what I am thinking now, is this ia brilliant way for WOTC to drive interest in old editions of the game, prior to starting to sell PDFs again. Do the core in book format, but them offer supplements and such electronically. If the main books are also electronic, it could be a great moneymakelr for WOTC.

 

[Treebore]

I don't know. I think if they did offer up the settings again, in the boxed sets, yes. In some other form? Very doubtful. I mainly want big maps, like are in the original boxed sets, so if they would want me to buy them yet again, I want those maps, preferably done with modern technology. Except the Greyhawk maps. Nothing beats Darlene's maps, even today, in my book. Except maybe Anna Meyers.

I could definitely go with the folio style Greyhawk came out in, but not a book. I want those big maps. I don't see them giving us those big maps in a book.

I'd also love for them to redo those Trail maps they did during the 2E days. Again, with modern map techniques, not old and original.

 

[Stormonu]

I posted this in the UE reprint thread, but I think it fits better here:

I'd love to see them reprint the entire line of settings. Boxed set would be best, slipcase would be nice, hardcover would be fine (hey, it was done with Council of Wyrms, FR and Dark Sun).

Actually, thinking about it, two slipcase "Worlds of D&D" would be cool with 1) Greyhawk, Forgotten Realms, Eberron, Birthright, Dragonlance (and Nentir Vale) campaign hardbacks and 2) Al-Qadim, Karu Tur, Dark Sun, Planescape, Ravenloft (and maybe Maztica) Campaign hardbacks. Maybe even 3) Council of Wyms, Jakandor, Spelljammer, Tale of the Comet, Lankhmar as a 3rd set.

Make them edition-agnostic, and I'd think they would sell fairly well.

I think there's still a lot of interest in D&D's varied campaign worlds, just that for whatever reason, they've been reluctant to let them loose. I think "sets" of campaigns would actually sell better than re-releasing them individually, especially on some of the lesser supported or "not-fantasy-Europe" campaigns.

 

[slobster]

My fantasy is that 5E adopts an OGL that attracts third party publishers back to D&D, unleashing a horde of new settings and rules modules. Combined with Kickstarter to get the word out and fund promising new projects, I'm optimistic that such a strategy would lead to the greatest proliferation of settings in the history of D&D, enough to satisfy any niche.

Though I'd also like to see a few older products released, perhaps in system-neutral formats as [MENTION=52734]Stormonu[/MENTION] suggested.

 

[Stormonu]

Hmmm, thinking some more, perhaps 3 books per "set"


"Core Worlds Set I"
1) Greyhawk
2) Eberron
3) Forgotten Realms

"Core Worlds Set II"
1) Mystra
2) Birthright
3) Dragonlance

"Distant Lands"
1) Al-Qadim
2) Karu-Tur
3) Maztica

"Beyond Imagination"
1) Spelljammer
2) Planescape
3) Ravenloft

"New Vistas"
1) Dark Sun
2) Jakandor
3) Council of Wyrms

 

[Water Bob]

We have had, what, two and a half new settings since the Dawn of 3e (Ghostwalk being the half)? Could be time to let those creative juices flow again.

I think you've made an error in this comment. You're focussing on just WotC published settings. In fact, 3E was the Dawn of More Settings Than We've Ever Seen Before.

Maybe WotC didn't publish more settings because Third Party publishers glutted the market with almost uncountable d20 settings. With the boom of 3E and d20, a gamer couldn't turn left without running into a new setting.

The Conan RPG
Dragonlance (not published by WotC)
Theives World
The Black Company
Traveller d20
Spycraft
Blue Planet
Dune
Fading Suns
Kalamar
d20 Modern
Star Drive
Forgotten Realms
Greyhawk
Gamma World

And, that's just off the top of my head.

I would argue that, by far, we saw more settings with the publication of D&D 3.0 and the d20 system than with any other edition of D&D--including 2E.

 

[Yora]

I think of all the old settings beside Greyhawk and Forgotten Realms, the only ones that really made a lasting impression are Dark Sun, Planescape, and Ravenloft.

You sometimes hear fond mentions of Dragonlance and Birthright and Mystara seem to be almost entirely forgotten. And I didn't even know Jarkandor, Red Steel, and Council of Wyrms were TSR settings.

 

[Li Shenron]

I think "sets" of campaigns would actually sell better than re-releasing them individually, especially on some of the lesser supported or "not-fantasy-Europe" campaigns.

Hmmm, thinking some more, perhaps 3 books per "set"

I am quite skeptic on this idea. What makes you think they would sell better?

Maybe they would, e.g. to someone who doesn't yet know about D&D settings and would pick up a book with multiple ideas. But I would certainly stay away from such books unless I'm interested in all its settings or unless I absolutely wanted to run one of them, but in that case I'd be pissed off that I had to buy a book only for 1/3 of its content.

E.g. in your examples, I'd be interested in FR (although I already have 3e books), but I dislike Greyhawk and I hate Eberron; I am moderately interested in Birthright, but I dislike Dragonlance and ignore Mystara; I would love Al-Qadim but dislike Karatur and Maztica; I like Planescape but I'm neutral to Ravenloft and utterly cannot stand Spelljammer; and I'm neutral/uninterested in the last 3. The net result is that I would buy none of these 5.

Also I think that 1/3 of a book is not enough to run a setting. I have run Forgotten Realms and Rokugan in 3ed and bought a bunch of books for each, but at the beginning I was quite fine with just one book (well, 1 and a half for Rokugan since it's also based on OA). 1/3 of a book is really only a small introduction to the setting... not enough for a campaign.

So for the purpose of an introduction I think it would be much better that WotC would (a) put that introduction (even smaller that 1/3 of a book, could be just 30-40 pages) into a beginner's box set / basic game product for a setting that WotC really wants to push as default such as FR, or (b) provide a free introduction material for download from their website for other settings. Then publish the usual ~200-300 pages corebook for each setting but this time edition-free: with this size IMHO the setting corebook is large enough to be usable for a whole campaign and be actually more comprehensive than before.

For example IMHO a typical problem with D&D settings corebooks is that there is never space for monsters, so you always need to buy at least 2 books to properly get the "feel" of the setting, the corebook and the monsters book (all other supplements being generally less important). But if the corebooks are edition-free, all the space saved up - probably at least 1/3 - can be used for a decent selection of setting-specific monsters.

Just my 2cp.