Why Was Maztica So Weak?

[SHARK]

Greetings!

I've read or heard somewhere that what TSR did with Ed Greenwood's world of Faerun was *not* what he wanted at all. Especially the Maztica and Al-Quadim sections. Even the Oriental East might have not been what he wanted. Maztica seemed like a real bust to me, though. It was such a transparent adaptation. I thought if they wanted to make a aztec/mayan/indian themed section, they could have been a bit more original and creative about it, especially with the maps. Toril already is a very different continent, so why make a North and South America? I think more could have been done with Maztica especially. What do you think?

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

 

[Turanil]

Maztica was disappointing for many reasons (Al'Qadim was far much better). I finally sold it on ebay... The fact is, they turned it into a dull setting, where they could have made some great legendary place.

 

[Li Shenron]

I really am not in the league of guessing why it didn't work...

As someone who has little or no idea of Maztica, I can tell you that at least for me a pre-colombian type of setting starts off as less evocative than western-medieval, eastern-feudal or arabic.

But what really turns me off with Maztica it that it is part of Forgotten Realms, which then becomes a mockery of the real world if you have Zakhara, Karatur-Tur, etc, and that's a big thumb down for me when a fantasy setting tries to mirror real earth too much.

No idea if I am one of the few, but at least those are reasons that never attracted me to Maztica.

 

[Hand of Evil]

my feelings on it is that T$R was trying to satisfy the cry of the gamers of that time, which was new cultures/settings. Many of us wanted D&D with a different taste, sure there were other games out there that did it but we want our rule set. T$R did and did not hear us, they heard culture but did not apply; they just dropped the culture into the setting with Maztica, no balance. Al-Quadim was done better but approch was different, difference in rules caused issues, no balance.

This is just how I saw it.

 

[Zenodotus of Ephesus]

There may not have been enough actual knowledge of the real world setting being simulated (in fact and/or in legend), by those doing the simulating or those being targeted with the simulation for it to seem fantastical. Knowledge of medieval Europe (in fact and in legend) is sufficiently widespread that most gamers (those, at least, that are the traditional target market) can easily jump into a fantasy-medieval setting with some assurance of having a fairly common baseline of mutual assumptions. That's my suspicion, anyway.

 

[Joshua Randall]

As others have touched on, I think Maztica failed because most people are not as familiar with pre-Columbian America as they are with Medeival Europe. When the players can't relate to a setting, that setting faces an uphill battle for acceptance.

Also, of course, Maztica came along during the dark days of TSR. So the bad timing definitely contributed to it being a dud.

 

[Nellisir]

Maztica was basically too "realistic" an adaptation. Hishnaa and pluma were both pretty weak compared to your run of the mill mages. Combine that with the general lack of humanoids, and it just wasn't that interesting.

Cheers
Nell.

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

I haven't seen anything relating to it in a very long time. But I agree, transparent is the right word. It would have been better off as one of those green historical AD&D books. As it was, it seemed so contrived and forced, basically shoe-horned into FR.

Speaking of Al-Qadim, I just picked up the boxed set for the first time. Now that's a really spectacular product.

Maztica seemed like a real bust to me, though. It was such a transparent adaptation.

 

[mmadsen]

One serious weakness of a quasi-New World setting is that you can't present the greatest adventure stories of all time, which happened to take place in the real New World: the conquest of the Aztecs and the conquest of the Incas. If anything in real life reads like a fantasy epic, it's Bernal Diaz's first-hand account of Cortes's campaign in Mexico.

 

[eyebeams]

One serious weakness of a quasi-New World setting is that you can't present the greatest adventure stories of all time, which happened to take place in the real New World: the conquest of the Aztecs and the conquest of the Incas. If anything in real life reads like a fantasy epic, it's Bernal Diaz's first-hand account of Cortes's campaign in Mexico.

Given that there are real Mexica and Inca people whose lives are affected by its legacy, I'd say it would be in questionable taste. Incorporating D&D conventions like detectable, absolute morality would end up being unrealistic or vaguely offensive.