What WotC hasnt done yet: Old Settings

[havard]

One of the reasons I got into 3E/D20: Dragonlance, Ravenloft, Dark Sun, Blackmoor and Greyhawk were all supported. Even classic favorites like Mystara and the Hollow World got several articles in the Paizo magazines.

While WotC has been rehashing alot of old concepts, they have stayed away from these types of products. Even when they gave us Dark Sun 4E, the books were IMO outstandingly boring due to the current philosophy that kids nowadays only care about exciting fight scenes and descriptions of culture and history and stuff. Well I care about that stuff and unlike those kids (if they even exist), I get a paycheck each month.

Now I know all about the idea of how the multiple campaign settings were bad for TSR, but they were also immensely popular. Supporting the settings with long product lines might be a bad idea, but the brands are out there, each with a fan base of its own. Why not feed us with a teaser every once in a while?

-Havard

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I don't subscribe to the digital versions of Dragon and Dungeon, but I was under the impression that they do periodically put out old setting content in that fashion. Weren't they going to work up the Sha'ir at some point for 4E?

 

[AdmundfortGeographer]

Even if they don't produce a product or product line, at minimum they could "name drop". Forget having an entire article revolve around a specific setting. Just write an article or column generically, but strategically scatter in places and names of established worlds.

 

[Dragonblade]

I loved the new Dark Sun books for 4e. They are the best DS books since the original boxed set from 1991, I think it was.

The 1995 revised DS box set sucked, and so did the 3e based Dark Sun Dragon articles from about 5 or 6 years ago, IMO.

 

[S'mon]

If they put out new Mystara and Birthright campaign setting books for 4e, I would buy them. I suspect I probably would not buy 4e Greyhawk or Dragonlance, though, but could possibly be convinced.

I'm a bit surprised they dropped their plan to do annual world-setting books after only 3 years (Forgotten Realms, Eberron, Dark Sun).

 

[delericho]

Most of the old settings have now been out of print sufficiently long that the occasional article in the e-mags won't cut it. What use is a Spelljammer article, if virtually nobody who is currently playing understands what it's talking about?

So, with the exceptions of Ravenloft and Dragonlance (plus FR, Eberron and DS, of course), in order to support the settings, they would need to go for full-blown book support (or an equivalently-expansive DDI equivalent).

Is the market really there for books on Birthright, Spelljammer, or even Al-Qadim?

 

[S'mon]

Is the market really there for books on Birthright, Spelljammer, or even Al-Qadim?

It's just one book. If they can do a single-adventure hardback like Revenge of the Giants, I'd think a campaign-setting book would be at least as practical and probably sell more. It's not like they're committing to a stream of supplements.

 

[delericho]

It's just one book.

Sure, it's one book. But when they're only putting out 6 or so books a year, the bar for entry is pretty damn high. And, unfortunately, a book on "Menzoberranzan" will sell many times more copies than "Spelljammer".

If they can do a single-adventure hardback like Revenge of the Giants, I'd think a campaign-setting book would be at least as practical and probably sell more.

Sadly, I think you're mistaken.

Firstly, I don't think they can do single-adventure hardbacks any longer. Last year's adventure (singular) was a boxed set designed to make heavy use of the card-mechanics they're currently pushing. Without that tie in, I doubt "Gardmore Abbey" would have been done. The previous adventures, "Revenge of the Giants" and "Tomb of Horrors" were both generic adventures, and both traded on the name recognition of classic adventures. In other words, they worked really hard to appeal as broadly as possible.

Honestly, I will be a little surprised if we see any print adventure from WotC this year. If we do, I'm pretty certain we'll see some sort of 'gimmick' that means it can't be a DDI product - card mechanics, or very specialised battlemats, or something.

By contrast, a setting like Spelljammer (or Birthright, or Al-Qadim, but probably exempting Ravenloft, Dragonlance and maybe Greyhawk) is an extremely niche product. Even at their height, they were only really of interest to a very small number of players. Of those, how many are still interested, are currently playing 4e, and are willing to pay WotC for an updated book? How many new players are really interested in "D&D Adventures in Space", and willing to pay $35 to find out?

Finally, you can always use more adventures, but how many settings can you use? After 4 years, most 4e players now have their setting - either it's Forgotten Realms, Eberron or Dark Sun, or it's Nentir Vale, or they've homebrewed. (Some few might be using a converted older setting as well, of course.) There is, of course, some market for people looking for new settings, because some people are always looking for something new, but how many, really?

(In fact, WotC would almost certainly be better served finding out which settings people currently use, if they don't already know, and providing an additional sourcebook for that setting. "Neverwinter" was a niche within the FR niche, but it almost certainly sold more than "Spelljammer" would - and if they were to do "Waterdeep" next, that would probably outsell it, too.)

 

[the Jester]

Even if they don't produce a product or product line, at minimum they could "name drop". Forget having an entire article revolve around a specific setting. Just write an article or column generically, but strategically scatter in places and names of established worlds.

Uh... they do.

It's just one book. If they can do a single-adventure hardback like Revenge of the Giants, I'd think a campaign-setting book would be at least as practical and probably sell more. It's not like they're committing to a stream of supplements.

Oh dear.

A generic adventure slots nicely into every campaign; it's a possible sell to 100% of groups. A new Spelljammer book is a niche appeal to a small part of an already-small market. If it won't sell as much as a hardback adventure, there's no real motivation to print a setting book before that advneture. At best, I expect maybe 20% to 25% of WotC's customer base would buy such a book.

The sales just ain't there (IMHO).

 

[DEFCON 1]

Let's also not forget the fact that because of the ease with which it is to build encounters nowadays (especially if you are a part of DDI and have the Monster Builder)... there's absolutely no reason why you can't just buy the setting material (or use it, if you already own it) from the previous edition and then just create new encounters for it.

I mean, if you own all the Eberron sourcebooks, like Five Nations, or Sharn, or Secrets of Xen'drik etc... what exactly do you need them reprinted in a 4E format for except for so-called "official" 4E statblocks for the monsters and NPCs? Isn't all the fluff still completely valid and usable? It seems so to me. And if you don't own these books... you can pick almost all of them up on Amazon at a much cheaper price than you would if WotC recreated them with a 4E logo slapped on the front.