Terath Ninir
Yog Sothoth loves you
The setting was of rather limited interest to the general gamer, frankly. Sure, it hit the spot for many people, but it didn't appeal to many more.
Why did the Scarred Lands fail?
- Thread starter Acid_crash
- Start date
Nightfall
Sage of the Scarred Lands
Right...and Midnight, Oathbound, and Eberron are so more open... 
In any event regardless of what people think, cancellation doesn't equal failure. Did the TV show Angel fail because it got canned at the end of season 5? No it was execs that had NO faith in a good show. Same is true for Firefly AND Farscape.
The point in fact is, 3.5 helped to make some things about Scarred Lands hard. Regardless of the fact there was no "core" book, Midnight and Iron Kingdoms have done well. Maps are a little more sketchy but understandable. I would point out the world was still makeshift before the advent of R&R and Hollowfaust, and it only got more complicated because of the fact people wanted more.
Regardless, I'm here, I pimp and I will stand firm to bring back Scarred Lands. There are people that want it. So I will not falter.
In any event regardless of what people think, cancellation doesn't equal failure. Did the TV show Angel fail because it got canned at the end of season 5? No it was execs that had NO faith in a good show. Same is true for Firefly AND Farscape.
The point in fact is, 3.5 helped to make some things about Scarred Lands hard. Regardless of the fact there was no "core" book, Midnight and Iron Kingdoms have done well. Maps are a little more sketchy but understandable. I would point out the world was still makeshift before the advent of R&R and Hollowfaust, and it only got more complicated because of the fact people wanted more.
Regardless, I'm here, I pimp and I will stand firm to bring back Scarred Lands. There are people that want it. So I will not falter.
Testament
First Post
I agree with a lot of other people here that the lack of an actual setting book hurt it. What I saw of it was amazing, inventive stuff (I have Mithril and Hollowfaust, and am probably going to grab Shelzar), but the cost of actually going full blown Scarred Lands required 3-5 books. You needed Creature Collection, Relics & Rituals, a regional Gazzeteer and AFAIK, The Divine and The Defeated.
No thanks, way too much dosh for a student.
No thanks, way too much dosh for a student.
Knoxgamer said:
This pretty much explains why I ultimately decided against the SL setting.
Publishers need to realize that among the very first products needed to support a campaign setting is some kind of primer for the players. Don't give too much detail--players don't need or want that much. Just something brief that establishes the basic elements. This could just be a PDF of 12 pages or so with a map or two, but AFAIK nobody bothers to do this.
Was SL one of those settings that didn't use all of the PHB core classes, races, etc? There's something to be said for the commercial strength of the "same-but-different" Eberron philosophy.
not enough adventures
I never bought a Scarred Lands book, but here is my view from the sidelines as a consumer that did buy a lot of other products. It seems to me that SL started strong but finished weak. The primary problem, as I see it, is that there were too few adventures. Out of 30-something (noted at near 40 above) there were 3 modules. THREE! WotC can get away with that because they own the D&D brand and there were & are many 3rd party publishers printing & selling adventures for the game--notably Dungeon magazine, Necromancer, Gooman Games, etc. SL was all too common in its approach with many sourcebooks and few adventures. When I DM, I want a game that is cool; but I need adventures (fully fleshed out, not just hooks). I just don't have the time or the inclination to write my own, particularly for a setting or system or game that varies from core D&D. This is an unfortunate failing of many publishers. It seems that it is much easier to write a book of new classes, feats, spells, etc. than an actual adventure.
I remember seeing SL games played at my FLGS. A buddy bought many of the first books. No more. The local games have stopped. My friend quit buying long ago. There just wasn't anything new that was appealing. An unplayed game is a dead game. A setting has to have a lot on the ball to compete with Greyhawk, the Forgotten Relams & Eberron (now), all of which have adventure support; as well as the myriad of other variant settings that have varying degrees of adventure support. I think SL just ran out of gas.
I've said it before, and it bear repeating. Adventures grow the market. Sourcebooks exploit the market.
I never bought a Scarred Lands book, but here is my view from the sidelines as a consumer that did buy a lot of other products. It seems to me that SL started strong but finished weak. The primary problem, as I see it, is that there were too few adventures. Out of 30-something (noted at near 40 above) there were 3 modules. THREE! WotC can get away with that because they own the D&D brand and there were & are many 3rd party publishers printing & selling adventures for the game--notably Dungeon magazine, Necromancer, Gooman Games, etc. SL was all too common in its approach with many sourcebooks and few adventures. When I DM, I want a game that is cool; but I need adventures (fully fleshed out, not just hooks). I just don't have the time or the inclination to write my own, particularly for a setting or system or game that varies from core D&D. This is an unfortunate failing of many publishers. It seems that it is much easier to write a book of new classes, feats, spells, etc. than an actual adventure.
I remember seeing SL games played at my FLGS. A buddy bought many of the first books. No more. The local games have stopped. My friend quit buying long ago. There just wasn't anything new that was appealing. An unplayed game is a dead game. A setting has to have a lot on the ball to compete with Greyhawk, the Forgotten Relams & Eberron (now), all of which have adventure support; as well as the myriad of other variant settings that have varying degrees of adventure support. I think SL just ran out of gas.
I've said it before, and it bear repeating. Adventures grow the market. Sourcebooks exploit the market.
Evilhalfling
Adventurer
Nightfall said:
Firefly did fail, it was treated badly, not promoted and not given time.
I was one of the crowd that dismissed it at first, due to unfamiliarity and conflicting sceduals. Now I would not part with my DvDs and plan a Serenity premiere party.
now SL ran from (checking my CC)from 2000 to 2004 and produced what 40 books? Zounds. I only have two books from the series, tying Expedecious Retreat Press for my largest 3rd party collection. I stole enough ideas and monsters from those two books to have made them very worthwhile. Now If I could just get my library to stock them, as well as they do WotC.....
Over production certainly seems like the most likely answer, as the cost of
40 books is far more than most of us are willing to spend.
Zelda Themelin
First Post
Many good reasons here. I agree with Tricktergod's points.
Lack of errata, and web-support, coupled with product quality.
Meaning partially bad art, lack of good maps and errors both in sense of rules and plot. And missing monsters and npc:s, which were never errated in any way.
However, for me Scarred Land's greatest failure was, that it was turned from great and unique setting into some avarage re-warmed basic fantasy setting.
There were some good ideas yes, but generally, setting was getting lamer and lamer with each new book.
Maybe it's just that after promising start, setting's unique skin was ripped off and replaced with something "safe" and "typical" with "base D&D feel".
I didn't like how they changed things that were decided as something else in previous book.
Or how many writers seemed quite ignorant or uncaring for details, both important and less important ones. that made me doubt how many of them actually play D&D (so strange rule errors) or have bothered to read through previous Scarred Lands books.
Of course, lack of good starting points for campaing in books. They had amazing number of less than half-important areas, but no book about Darakeene, Albadia or Vesh, which would have been greatest places for setting books. Also, in a way, most base-fantasy places too, so pretty easy to use in non-Scarred Lands games too.
Not enought adventures and too much metaplot combined didn't do well. Of course existing adventure series had quite bad maps, which was major complain of my dm, who used them. That, and few plot-issues.
For me, and people I game with Scarred Lands line just lost it's feeling, and it became some other, less appealing world. Still some good stuff, but generally boring world.
Lack of errata, and web-support, coupled with product quality.
Meaning partially bad art, lack of good maps and errors both in sense of rules and plot. And missing monsters and npc:s, which were never errated in any way.
However, for me Scarred Land's greatest failure was, that it was turned from great and unique setting into some avarage re-warmed basic fantasy setting.
There were some good ideas yes, but generally, setting was getting lamer and lamer with each new book.
Maybe it's just that after promising start, setting's unique skin was ripped off and replaced with something "safe" and "typical" with "base D&D feel".
I didn't like how they changed things that were decided as something else in previous book.
Or how many writers seemed quite ignorant or uncaring for details, both important and less important ones. that made me doubt how many of them actually play D&D (so strange rule errors) or have bothered to read through previous Scarred Lands books.
Of course, lack of good starting points for campaing in books. They had amazing number of less than half-important areas, but no book about Darakeene, Albadia or Vesh, which would have been greatest places for setting books. Also, in a way, most base-fantasy places too, so pretty easy to use in non-Scarred Lands games too.
Not enought adventures and too much metaplot combined didn't do well. Of course existing adventure series had quite bad maps, which was major complain of my dm, who used them. That, and few plot-issues.
For me, and people I game with Scarred Lands line just lost it's feeling, and it became some other, less appealing world. Still some good stuff, but generally boring world.
Similar Threads
