D&D General Why TSR-era D&D Will Always Be D&D

[payn]

Well, there are a number of settings that (in good faith) I don't like.

But I don't spend my time arguing that WoTC shouldn't publish those settings, and deprive people that do like them of the pleasure of seeing something they enjoy.

....which makes me think that maybe the people who are doing the arguing probably have other things in mind.

There is a thought that any amount of time and resources spent on stuff for other people, is a lost opportunity of spending time on stuff that's specifically for me. For the record, I do not think this way.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

I mean the only setting I dislike enough to argue they should stop publishing is FR so I know it is a lost point... but all I am saying is that some of those people MUST have good reasons not the ones you listed.

I am sure that they think that it's a good reason.

But as a general rule, "I don't like something, so people that do like it should never have it," is usually .... not a good reason. No matter what type of mental gymnastics you go through to justify it.

 

[James Gasik]

For a good example of that exact line of logic, go dig up the Psionics thread from a few months back. There were quite a few posts that came down to "we don't want WotC working on psionics because it will waste developer time that could be used on projects people actually want".

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

For a good example of that exact line of logic, go dig up the Psionics thread from a few months back. There were quite a few posts that came down to "we don't want WotC working on psionics because it will waste developer time that could be used on projects people actually want".

Uh ... nope.

Look, resources are, in fact, finite. And choices do have to be made. But ... that's just not the case.

Since 2014 (SEVEN FULL YEARS AGO), WoTC has released the following major hardcovers or revisions:

Rulebooks
1. PHB
2. MM
3. DMG
4. VGTM
5. XGTE
6. MToF
7. TCoE
8. FTOD
9. MP: Monsters of the Multiverse

That's more than a rulebook a year.

Campaigns
10. SCAG (FR)
11. Ravnica
12. Acquisitions Incorporated (FR, kinda)
13. Eberron
14. Wildemount
15. Theros
16. Ravenloft
17. Strixhaven
18 Spelljammer (CONFIRMED!)

That's more than a campaign setting each year. Not to mention the numerous APs, including one that they already set in Greyhawk.

If it was the case that they were barely putting forth new rules now (psionics) or barely putting forth new campaign settings (Greyhawk), that's one thing, But it seems pretty obvious now that they can handle pumping out rules for either psionics or Greyhawk if they are able to put out this content.

I do appreciate people sticking up for the time constraints and hiring practices of large corporations (ahem), but ... yeah, color me unimpressed with the whole, "It's not that I'm against the thing you like, I'm just really concerned that if they do the thing you like, we might not get enough rules or other campaign settings in the future! Allow me to express .... my concern."

 

[Thomas Shey]

There is a thought that any amount of time and resources spent on stuff for other people, is a lost opportunity of spending time on stuff that's specifically for me. For the record, I do not think this way.

Yeah, the battle for mindspace is absolutely a thing with some people just by itself, and when it comes to published materials its even more true.

 

[Greg Benage]

But I don't spend my time arguing that WoTC shouldn't publish those settings, and deprive people that do like them of the pleasure of seeing something they enjoy.

I'm guessing that comes up in the context of those "What should Wizards publish next?" or "Guess the mystery book" threads. In which case, if one is going to participate in those threads at all, opinion statements such as this don't seem out of place. I wouldn't jump to the conclusion that it's about depriving people of pleasure. I don't have the sense that people are dropping "Greyhawk sucks" threads all willy-nilly.

 

[Azzy]

For a good example of that exact line of logic, go dig up the Psionics thread from a few months back. There were quite a few posts that came down to "we don't want WotC working on psionics because it will waste developer time that could be used on projects people actually want".

Yup. As I am both a Greyhawk fan as well as a psionics fan, I'm pretty hyper-aware of that BS.

 

[James Gasik]

Especially since both things crossover- according to legend, psionics came to Oerth via a crashed Illithid spacecraft...

 

[Eric V]

Yup. As I am both a Greyhawk fan as well as a psionics fan, I'm pretty hyper-aware of that BS.

Same. As well, after years of making stuff for 5e, is it still so imperative that certain products not be made for fear of missing out on other stuff the designers could be doing?

 

[Enevhar Aldarion]

I started playing in 1981 and bought and read the Greyhawk stuff and it was just okay. Then along came the Realms in 1987 and it like a bunch of color after the drab gray of Greyhawk. Funny thing is that all the games I played in or ran during the 80's were mainly homebrew settings, so I actually played very little in either published setting, but I can say that the Realms had more stuff taken from it and used in the homebrews. It is more of a kitchen sink setting and easier to use in pieces. This is part of why I think the Greyhawk setting, as a whole, will never get published again.