Why won't WOtC let another company publish...

[kenobi65]

Personally I think Greyhawk is the closest to this, but still heavily influenced by tolkienesque fantsy.

I think Gary might argue that one with you. IIRC, he's said that he was primarily influenced by other sources, such as Lieber, Vance, and Howard. There's certainly a Tolkienesque factor in there (particularly the non-human races), but I think "heavily influenced" is a bit of a stretch.

 

[kenmarable]

Back in 2002 WotC asked us if we were intersted in Dark Sun. I said sure, but that we were even more interested in Al-Qadim (that being my favorite of the 2E settings). This seemed to surprise them but they were willing to talk. This was the point when they were doing things like licensing out Ravenloft. A few months later something must have happened because they put the brakes on the whole thing.

Oh, the pain!! I would have loved to see either of those from you guys. Ah, the sorrow for the great products floating out there unwritten.

(Oh, and I liked Ghostwalk, too. But more as an interesting ruleset than as a setting.)

 

[Qualidar]

...but that we were even more interested in Al-Qadim (that being my favorite of the 2E settings).

Yet another reason why Green Ronin is locked in a steel cage match with Paizo for my heart's "Best RPG Company EVA!!!!!" prize.

 

[Shemeska]

I personally doubt that WoTC will ever license out the Planescape campaign setting. While WoTC has not resurrected the setting, they've made use of the materials in just about every book that has anything remotely to do with the Great Wheel Core cosmology. I can't see them giving up that sort of IP to an outside company.

It would be difficult to handle given that it was a metasetting more than anything else. You would either have to restrict the holder of the license to not including any references to all the other campaign settings that touched upon Planescape (often heavily), or you'd have to make them pay for the use of those other properties, or you would have to restrict them to just making a book on a heavily whitewashed Sigil and nothing else.

In the first case the setting would be either a hollow shell, or an outright mockery of its original self. Rowan Darkwood from Greyhawk but also involved in the fight against Zhengyi the Witch King in the Bloodstone lands of Toril? Can't mention it. An apprentice of Trobriand in Sigil? Can't mention that either. The ghetto of New Tyr in Sigil's Hive Ward? Nope because it's Dark Sun stuff. Tarholt the Dwarf? He's from Krynn so can't do that either.

The license wouldn't be worth it at that point quite honestly.

In the second case you'd risk having WotC standing over your shoulder to approve or deny everything you did, worried that you'd step on their toes with all the stuff that interacted with their planar material. And of course, since Dragonlance is already leased out, given the response the DL folks had to DL references in Fiendish Codex I, imagine if DL stuff popped up in a 3.x Planescape product line; wouldn't be pretty. And then there's the 3e FR cosmology, and you'd end up having to ignore it or somehow find a way to pay lip service to it in a 3.x Planescape line. Considering how often FR persons and gods were involved in things, you couldn't just ignore that material entirely.

Those two cosmological retcons make things difficult at the very least.

And for the third case, a book just on Sigil: it's possible, but we still have the issue of all the other campaign worlds who have people and places and gods etc showing up in Sigil, some as major things in the City of Doors or the city's history. Mention them and stay true to the material and you'll have the awkwardness of the 3e FR stuff, and quite possibly a pitchfork wielding mob of DL fans at the gates. Don't mention them and you've gutted a lot of what made the place unique and added to its own flavor. Now it's still possible to do a really good book, but you'd have to seriously mince words and allude rather than state certain facts about people, places, gods, organizations, etc. If FC:I could do what it did, you could take that sort of approach and do just a Sigil book, but it would be a challange.

That said, I'd love to see a hardcover on Sigil that was true to the (meta)setting.

 

[Mystaros]

When I decided to start up Adventure Games Publishing, I inquired with Wizards of the Coast about licensing several lines (notably, Mystara and Gamma World). As Pramas mentioned, they are not currently interested in licensing anything out; no reason was given, simply a standard "We are not interested in licensing X out at this time" kind of response. I think Chris' analysis of the situation is about right, though, in that they have once again cleaved to the philosophy that "less is more" as far as products versus sales.

Just means we gotta be more creative with new kinds of products...

 

[Banshee16]

Back in 2002 WotC asked us if we were intersted in Dark Sun. I said sure, but that we were even more interested in Al-Qadim (that being my favorite of the 2E settings). This seemed to surprise them but they were willing to talk. This was the point when they were doing things like licensing out Ravenloft. A few months later something must have happened because they put the brakes on the whole thing.

I will say I was very surprised when they started licensing stuff out because the internal analysis leading up to 3E had been that having that many campaign settings had been a mistake. It seemed strange to say that and then let other companies bring them all back. I think it's likely that thinking reasserted itself and that's why Dark Sun and Al-Qadim did not get licensed out.

I'm not sure how it really affects them...those other settings would still drive the sales of core books. Just because I buy Midnight and Swashbuckling Adventures doesn't mean I've stopped purchasing other WotC books, as an example.

Banshee

 

[Psion]

Personally - I totally expect to see a Planescape hardcover from WotC in the next year or so. WotC is running out of topics for books, and as a one off, it would do as well as the Book of Nine Swords or Heroes of Horror. And as its not an exclusive "world" setting per se, it does not really compete with that aspect of their product line.

I am doubtful, but that thought had crossed my mind.

More important, I don't know if they would do it justice.

 

[Ranger REG]

I find it unfair if you are paying a licensing fee and royalties and are then set up to miss out on the book that will make you the most money, especially when WotC doesn't think its a valuable enough comodity to do it themselves. They are already making money off of it without taking any risks so explain to me how their set up does anything but discourage a company from publishing any of the settings? Or is it better to dissapoint loyal fans because you have to make the most money possible?

You can disappoint loyal fans in two ways:

1. Not continuing the favorite product/setting line.

2. Allow a licensed publisher to make inferior quality products for their favored product/setting line.

Are you telling me #2 is the lesser of two evils? Better crap than nothing?

Sorry I have no problem with WotC making money but if they have to publish the corebook, then once again why not just give us the one-shot campaign settings that people would be happy with, and if enough sell of one then continue the line?

You're asking them to take a risk. If they revive 5 lines but only managed to make profit on 2 of them to continue, the other three that will shut down will have disappointed and disgruntled fans (more disgruntled than you are now).

It amazes me that they were willing to do tis with something like Ghostwalk(no entrenched fanbase) but won't with settings that already have a fanbase.

SKR pushed for what seems to be his last product as a payrolled employee of WotC. And even THAT didn't do too well, so this a BAD example for you to build your case on for the other brands.

 

[JVisgaitis]

Back in 2002 WotC asked us if we were intersted in Dark Sun. I said sure, but that we were even more interested in Al-Qadim (that being my favorite of the 2E settings).

Damn! Those would have been a pair of fine books on my shelf. Oh well...

 

[Graf]

Think about it like this:

WotC publishes RPGs and makes money on it. (they do other stuff too but we’re talking abour RPGs).

They are currently producing books and making a profit.
They have 90% of the first tier IP for the DnD game.
(Basically Iron Kingdoms is the only 1st tier quality setting they don’t have).

They already produce as many books as the market can reasonably absorb.
Through their relationships with Dungeon and Dragon they indirectly dominate the adventures and niche gaming segments as well.

Why would they turn over IP to someone else?
Why devote massive quantities of internal resources to working with some small operation to produce one big book when they can do that themselves?

The “Ravenloft experiment” demonstrated that even with the backing of the 2nd most powerful company (white wolf) the original settings don’t have enough sales to be attractive.

Better to occasionally dribble out something in Dragon/Dungeon to stoke the fanbase and keep the IP alive without expending resources.

If you really wanted to run any of those settings you have a -huge- volume of fluff and crunch available to you already from prior editions and the ‘net.