When is a campaign setting no longer relevant?

[Dire Bare]

Heh, yeah -- what a joke it would be if some losers tried to make a buck off that pathetically irrelevant Middle-Earth. I mean, the hobbits aren't even vicious cannibals!

Que?

 

[Shemeska]

If WotC had introduced a 4e Realms with very minimal changes, the existing fans would have most certainly purchased the books. But how many folks new to D&D and/or the Realms would have?

Ultimately WotC can only hope to draw in more people than they lost, given the scope and scale of the changes they made to the setting. IMO without continuing active support outside of the RPGA and the occasional DDI article, I'm not sure how fresh and relevant the setting may remain within 4e itself though even over just the next few years. It's not a model that's been tried before, and it's certainly a gamble. Without knowing any of the numbers involved, I think we'll know if it was a success or not depending on how closely any future 4e settings fall to the 4e FR model of massive changes, retcons, time-jumps, etc.

 

[Bluenose]

Ultimately WotC can only hope to draw in more people than they lost, given the scope and scale of the changes they made to the setting. IMO without continuing active support outside of the RPGA and the occasional DDI article, I'm not sure how fresh and relevant the setting may remain within 4e itself though even over just the next few years. It's not a model that's been tried before, and it's certainly a gamble. Without knowing any of the numbers involved, I think we'll know if it was a success or not depending on how closely any future 4e settings fall to the 4e FR model of massive changes, retcons, time-jumps, etc.

White Wolf have followed a very similar model with some of their lines. They keep putting out material for Exalted, or VtM, or Mage, but they've also got products like Hunter and Changeling where everything they're going to do for the product line is produced over one year. I'm not convinced that it's something that should work the same way with FR/Eb/DS, but it's not as unique an idea as you suggest.

 

[Shemeska]

White Wolf have followed a very similar model with some of their lines. They keep putting out material for Exalted, or VtM, or Mage, but they've also got products like Hunter and Changeling where everything they're going to do for the product line is produced over one year. I'm not convinced that it's something that should work the same way with FR/Eb/DS, but it's not as unique an idea as you suggest.

I'm not sure how similar it is though, since WW is putting out a heck of a lot more material for Hunter, Changeling, etc than what WotC is doing for FR (only two actual books). And WW then with Changeling, because it was so popular, they're putting out a few extra books (which have been awesome).

 

[wedgeski]

I don't think a campaign setting is ever "relevant", other than as a reflection of the game as it stood at the time it was created. So instead of becoming irrelevant, it just becomes old, worn out, over-used, or simply uninteresting. I would classify several D&D settings as "uninteresting", but that is just one gamer's opinion.

And I hope we can stop bringing up *literary* settings like Hyboria or Middle Earth because they are wholly irrelevant... to this discussion at least. Game settings are fair sport for reboots and overhauls, and always have been.

 

[rounser]

And I hope we can stop bringing up *literary* settings like Hyboria or Middle Earth because they are wholly irrelevant... to this discussion at least. Game settings are fair sport for reboots and overhauls, and always have been.

Only because the rules get overhauled, and the game setting reality gets "reinterpreted" in light of those changes. Often that's a necessary evil, and an awkward compromise, not "fair sport". People would prefer to believe in a consistent game world too. And they can if they get off the rules update juice.

 

[Aus_Snow]

And I hope we can stop bringing up *literary* settings like Hyboria or Middle Earth because they are wholly irrelevant... to this discussion at least. Game settings are fair sport for reboots and overhauls, and always have been.

Rubbish. Those two (and several others) *are* game settings, even if they didn't start out that way. Several game settings have at some stage become literary settings, too. . . oh noes! Strike those out as well, then.

As for 'fair sport', well sure, anything for the sake of brute force sales increases. True enough.

 

[Bumbles]

And for that matter, many literary settings have themselves undergone reboots, or the author has effectively said "I know all of you like this, but I'm done now, so I'm moving on" when the time came.

Occasionally this has riled up some of their fans as well. Mercedes Lackey is one victim of this. To some extent, so is George R. R. Martin. J. K. Rowling may yet end up being afflicted as well. Howard died relatively young, which may have caused some of the changes to Conan as his influence on his own works was relatively short. And yes, Conan has been changed over the years. And I think the mention of the changes to LOTR were covered already so I won't go into those.

Another example might be Tom Clancy's book though. He has had to adapt to meet the spirit of the times, but some of the directions he's gone have been....far-fetched in my opinion, which is why I ceased reading them.

 

[Desdichado]

Fantasy settings absolutely can become dated, to the degree that they reflect concerns, attitudes, and tastes of the times in which they are created. Older D&D settings have a very strong vibe of belonging to the kind of fantasy that was being published in short stories and short novels through the 60s and early 70s. The fantasy landscape changed since. Do these early D&D settings reflect that change?

It's easy for us to say, "hey, these are classics, timeless!" but are they? Or is it that most of us are middle-aged folks who's tastes crystalized when this type of fantasy was still current and have been somewhat frozen ever since? If I take Greyhawk to my 13 year old son, is he going to think it's intriguing? Interesting? Relevent to him?

I dunno. I wouldn't ever do it, because my tastes have changed, and I prefer different types of settings myself. I guess I don't have any answers other than to say that there's a perception, at least, that settings like Greyhawk, for instance, is the setting of older grognards. This suggests that the setting is dated, and doesn't appeal to newer audiences. Is this true, though? I dunno.

Not only that, as others have pointed out, some other settings have a timelessness to them. Hyborea is still cool. Middle-earth isn't dated. :shrug:

 

[Bumbles]

Two examples out of how many examples of fantasy fiction though? There may be some timeless classics that are the exception and manage to endure, but I think more are ground under the press of history.