WotC Sneak Peek Seminar

[trollwad]

the need to keep redoing gygax's and hickman's works speaks volumes about the creativity of today's large staff vs. entrepreneurial gamer/creators thirty years ago

 

[JoeGKushner]

the need to keep redoing gygax's and hickman's works speaks volumes about the creativity of today's large staff vs. entrepreneurial gamer/creators thirty years ago

I'd disagree.

I'd say it speaks volumes about the power of nostalgia.

 

[Scribble]

I'd disagree.

I'd say it speaks volumes about the power of nostalgia.

I agree... They were a great creative force in their time, but I think the redux aren't because of a lack of creativity, as opposed to a "this will sell because people have a fond memory of the original..."

 

[Shade]

I agree... They were a great creative force in their time, but I think the redux aren't because of a lack of creativity, as opposed to a "this will sell because people have a fond memory of the original..."

Yep. I will buy these because I have a fond memory of the originals.

 

[buzz]

the need to keep redoing gygax's and hickman's works speaks volumes about the creativity of today's large staff vs. entrepreneurial gamer/creators thirty years ago

At one point in the seminar, Chris Perkins polled the audience about their desire to see "classic" material re-used. It was a small audience, but there were enough people who raised their hands for "yes" that I think it has less to do with WotC being uncreative and more that D&D fans are simply interested in seeing familiar stuff return.

Granted, given how little 3.x WotC product has been devoted to re-hashing classic AD&D material (and how much classic OD&D/AD&D content was liberally borrowed from popular F&SF fiction of the time), I think that your statement is pretty unjustified, if not outright offensive.

EDIT: Look at the recent dust-ups about Mearls daring to even posit changes to the rust monster and ogre mage. WotC gets slammed no matter what they do.

 

[buzz]

One of the images looks very much like another Monster Manual.

The image in question will be, IMO, a revised Savage Species equivalent. It's a brown-cover, sculpted book. The sculpt is of an illithid head, whcih would imply something psionics-related, but since that's already been revised for 3.5, I'm guessing that's not what it is. This is obviously a "core" book, and a monster PC volume seems a likely "core" product.

I'm hoping that's what it is, at least.

 

[buzz]

My favorite bits from the seminar:

1) That Expedition to Castle Ravenloft will include d20M material.

b) That a "Feat Compendium" has apparently been on the designer's minds for some time now.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I'd love to see a revised/replacement Savage Species.

And while I like new stuff, I'm certainly one interested in revamps of truly classic materials (I don't need an update of Gargoyle! or Howl from the North), simply because it's a LOT of work to update the originals and sometimes the bare bones are too skimpy to make it worth the hassle. I'd happily pay a premium to have the pros do an update for me. I'll be first in line for Expedition to Castle Ravenloft and Expedition to the Demonweb Pits. (I'm ambivalent about Expedition to Castle Greyhawk, if only because I have a giant dungeon already in Ptolus and if I didn't, I'd likely grab RAR.) I would be all over an Expedition to Dungeonland or Expedition Against the Giants like ugly on an ape.

 

[Erik Mona]

At one point in the seminar, Chris Perkins polled the audience about their desire to see "classic" material re-used. It was a small audience, but there were enough people who raised their hands for "yes" that I think it has less to do with WotC being uncreative and more that D&D fans are simply interested in seeing familiar stuff return.

I was sitting at the back of the room in that seminar, and did a quick count. Something like 35 people raised their hands when Chris asked if people were interested in content that tied back to the lore of D&D.

I'm pretty sure that only two people raised their hands to say that they didn't care for such products.

Not at all surprising, given the reaction to nostalgic content when we put it in Dragon and Dungeon, but an interesting data point none the less.

--Erik

 

[paulsometimes]

I'm all for the old stuff getting rehashed due to me not playing D&D back in the day and because of that, I missed out on those adventures. Now I have to listen to others talk so fondly about those adventures when they reminisce and I'd like to know what I'm missing out on.