Why did the Scarred Lands fail?

[Desdichado]

In general, I'm not a huge fan of settings (because I prefer to homebrew) but it seemed all the really good ideas Scarred Lands had, they had early. They simply climaxed too early, with all the innuendo that brings to the table.

I really like some of their ideas; Hollowfaust was truly unique, and you can't go wrong with Warrens of the Ratmen. Their later stuff seemed pretty ho-hum to me, though.

 

[Trickstergod]

Farscape wasn't a failure because it just recently had a mini-series come out. It's had its obstacles, but wasn't a failure.

Firefly wasn't a failure because, last I heard, it does have a movie coming out at some point. So, while it perhaps still has some obstacles, it doesn't look to be a failure.

As for Angel, well, I'm sure it has some kind of product tie-in's with Buffy that, while not television, are seeing fit that it continues in some form.

Not to mention that just because something is good, it still can be a failure. As has been pointed out a number of times throughout this thread, sometimes failure has absolutely nothing to do with the quality of the books themselves.

Also, both Midnight and Iron Kingdoms do have a main campaign setting book, although the one for Iron Kingdoms was rather late to hit the shelves.

The sad thing is, at this point, I think it might be too little, too late for a true, essentially self-contained Scarred Lands book to grab anyones interest. The main core of buyers would already have most everything in it, whereas those who didn't buy the setting to begin with have probably since already been turned off to the setting. Right about now, I'd say there's about zero chance of anything being published for the setting except perhaps in the most miniscule of areas. Maybe something akin to the way Wizards of the Coast has been treating Planescape, with an occasional blurb about it here and there in a planar book, but that's about it. Fan support currently seems the only avenue to do it with.

 

[Moorcrys]

I'm actually a little disappointed they didn't go back for a fresh look at their earlier material when 3.5 came out. I would have been first in line to have bought a 'Complete Relics and Rituals' book -- updated and edited for 3.5 with some spell and item balance/cost issues addressed. That book would have been great, a la the Complete Book of Eldritch Might. I feel like they had some product loyalty that they didn't exploit... those who were interested in (and purchased) some of the material for its creativity but who didn't run or desire to run an actual Scarred Lands campaign.

The line originally had some great world ideas, but also presented product material that added to any campaign -- I often used the creature collection books and specific spells and items from the relics and rituals books, though I have my own homebrew campaign world. They had some great ideas in that setting.

 

[teitan]

I think, as a fan of the Scarred Lands mind you, that the line failed because it didn't seem to have a central focus. I mean sure you could use just the Ghelspad book and run hog wild, but it always felt incomplete to me and I just couldn't keep up with the line and it was scattered through so many books. I think if WW were to rerelease the world of Scarn that it should have a more centralized focus, a core book that honestly covers everything you need to use the setting in the same way that Eberron and the FRCS really covers just about everything...

Jason

 

[Nightfall]

Trick,

Don't agree it might be too little too late. It's only too late if we accept defeat. I don't. Now maybe yes the core "WotC' crowd has everything. But for me, I feel we can revamp it, make the changes necessary AND (much like Zelda's point) make it the way it should have been. (I still think Slacerian Godminds is a cool idea. But certainly toss out Jandaveos, or at least his "supposed" ressurrection)

Felon,

There were differences. For one unlike most d&d worlds, druids DON'T need gods. Eberron might have that but that's because it's more low magic oreinted. In my mind what SL should be is (and people can disagree) is a low magic item, high magic campaign setting. A place where spells and the special abilities of the core classes (along with feats) are what drive the setting as much the player's input.

Metaplotting might be a pain folks but I know for me it can be better IF you do it right. So yes, more adventures for the Scarred Lands (at least in PDF format) wouldn't be a bad thing. (Cheap to make AND you get some profit on occasion).

In any event SL might "fail" or "did fail" to some. To me it's not failing unless you accept it as inevitable. Core D&D fans NEED to have options beyond what WotC offers, if only because it's time we spoke out more and not accepted everything that comes from them blindly.

 

[J_A_Garlock]

. For one unlike most d&d worlds, druids DON'T need gods. Eberron might have that but that's because it's more low magic oreinted.).

QUOTE]

I'm sorry but I beg to differ. Eberron is not a low magic setting IMO.

 

[J_A_Garlock]

In any event SL might "fail" or "did fail" to some. To me it's not failing unless you accept it as inevitable. Core D&D fans NEED to have options beyond what WotC offers, if only because it's time we spoke out more and not accepted everything that comes from them blindly.

Perhaps the word "fail" isn't a good choice for you because of your love for the setting?

 

[Nightfall]

There's always that...but the fact is JA, Eberron IS low magic because a)
many NPCs aren't above 12th level and/or have LOTS of NPC classes. b) You don't see a lot of gods walking around...or high level monsters in areas that make it very dangerous for everyone. c) The planar structure while cool also limits the access to more powerful forces for many. It might not FEEL low magic but it's certainly nearly that in many respects compared to say FR or even GH to a degree.

 

[Trickstergod]

Eberron could be aptly described as a common magic, low power setting. Magic is abundant, but powerful NPC's are rare enough that cat's can be swung in the setting without smacking one. Spellcasters and non-spellcasters alike.

One of the better things about it is that the rulers of its nations actually tend to be a reasonable level, rather than the ridiculous amounts of power they reach in some settings.

The planar structure is also no less powerful than it is for any other setting. It simply presumes that Eberron is the center of things. Another plus, in my book.

And Nightfall, hope's all well and good to hold on to, but, short of the Scarred Lands being licensed out to another company, I don't see White Wolf or any of its other companies ever bothering with it on a major scale again. And in regards to it being licensed, I don't see the Scarred Lands to be a valuable enough commodity for another company to bother with it. Campaign settings are risky enough and the added cost of licensing a shakey line like the Scarred Lands, which lacks the name recognition of Dragonlance or Ravenloft or Conan or what not, makes it seem an unlikely prospect that anyone else will ever pick the Scarred Lands up.

At best, I can see more Relics and Rituals and Creature Collection books coming out for it, but these wouldn't be setting books with spells and monsters, they'd be monster and spell books with some setting attached. Even then, I wouldn't see them being marketed as Scarred Lands books, no more than the first Creature Collection or Relics and Rituals were.

 

[Psion]

Perhaps the word "fail" isn't a good choice for you because of your love for the setting?

I suspect that everyone is picking their words based on their regard or disdain, which makes the whole debate rather pointless. Or worse, emotive.

Scarred Lands is no longer being published as a line, a state of events that many game lines have endured and some have returned from. For some that is failure. Whether you define it that way or not, I, at the least, consider it unfortunate.