| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7970 Posts |
 Posted - 11 Dec 2020 : 02:56:17
|
Forgotten Realms, Dragonlance, Greyhawk, etc are all trademarked brands.
WotC nominally owns them all. But at the same time they have to observe contracts and agreements with all the original content creators, to consult them and to share some credit/recognition if nothing else. The Realms is further complicated by being a crowded collaboration of many dozens or hundreds of authors over the years.
I think it's obvious WotC would prefer to focus on a purely in-house "generic" setting than to continue emphasizing a setting which is entangled with special considerations (like, say, unusual obligations to and arrangements with Ed Greenwood). Let alone a setting which involves authors (like, say, Hickman and Weis) who might perhaps submit legal challenges (and costs) in the future.
The Realms has also endured many (too many) unpopular changes over the years. The so-called "largest subset of D&D gamers" who prefer the Realms are fragmented across editions - some are disinterested in the stuffy archaic lore of classic Realms, some are disinterested in the reformatted and overwritten lore of modern Realms - it seems unfitting to categorize them all within a single group when so many insist on firmly standing apart from WotC's vision of what the Realms should be. The generally marginal and underwhelming reception of 5E Realmslore suggests (to me) that it's simply no longer possible for WotC to make any single version of the Realms which pleases everyone ... so it seems logical for them to respond by barely making the effort, by channeling their efforts into other things which have better shots at appealing to "large subsets" of D&D gamers. |
[/Ayrik] |
Edited by - Ayrik on 11 Dec 2020 03:01:40 |
 |
|
|
cpthero2
Great Reader
USA
2285 Posts |
Posted - 11 Dec 2020 : 03:13:48
|
Great Reader Ayrik,
I feel based on everything you just said, that that is very much likely why WotC is trying to converge everything to limit cost inputs into their COGS, and to increase marginal income. I think it literally boils down to something that simple. As others have said too: WotC gives exactly zero f**ks about it's consumers, unless they are paying money and their margins are high. Hasbro, the Dark Overlord, is always pushing them to increase margins, and this recent change seems to make sense.
It would be much easier for them to just slowly choke out settings in general, and to push the generic game itself.
As well, I hope this is a message to all who are creating settings to really think about who you sell your IP's too, for they are likely going to end up in a ditch, along with the love that brought them to popular success.
Best regards,
|
Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 11 Dec 2020 : 04:17:44
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
The generally marginal and underwhelming reception of 5E Realmslore suggests (to me) that it's simply no longer possible for WotC to make any single version of the Realms which pleases everyone ... so it seems logical for them to respond by barely making the effort, by channeling their efforts into other things which have better shots at appealing to "large subsets" of D&D gamers.
I dunno, their recent things have been to just drop in whatever they can find, or to publish something where all the work was already done by someone else... I don't think it's that they can't make a version of the Realms to please a majority -- I think they simply don't want to make the effort to even try. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen!  |
|
|
|
bloodtide_the_red
Learned Scribe
USA
297 Posts |
Posted - 11 Dec 2020 : 04:45:44
|
quote:
Originally posted by cpthero2
Nice! If you don't mind sharing: what did you do in the industry? That is a cool position to have been in for having insider information.
Part owner, manager, assistant manager and paid GM across a couple stores. One of my paid GM jobs was at The Game Keeper: Wizards game store, located at the mall(the enclosed kind). We set up tables in the mall-way outside the store. It was such a great way to get people walk by, see and hear and game and get interested.
Before 3E, sales were super low across the board for just about all RPGs. On the weekend we'd just have the one die hard Warhammer table and an empty store. Then less then a year after 3E came out, everything changed. Suddenly gaming was popular. I alone ran The Sunless Citadel at least 100 times for 100 groups.
At first people bought 3E and then 3.5E like hotcakes. For a normal book in normal times the store would only buy say five of a new book. Buy the time the 3.0 FR campaign book came out, we got a whole box (25 books). We sold out in less then a day. Over the next couple weeks, we had a huge list of people that wanted the book. And this was before internet shopping and even 'common' cell phones.
3.5E came and most people were fine with re paying for the "new and improved rules", but not too long after that shoppers started to slow down. The Wizard massive $30-$40 hardcovers were not so much in demand. But the D20 Open Content really saved the day: people much more liked buying a $12 or $15 softcover book.
Then the economy started to go down. The store was still full of people playing games, but they were not buying much. A lot of the later 3.5E stuff sat on the shelf, until things like the Black Friday sale.
Few wanted 4E. Not only did they not want to pay tons of money for new core rules, but they did not want a radically different game. It sold a bit at first, but dropped real fast.
The Game Keeper is long gone...it did not make it much past 3.5E first books. Lots of other stores closed too. Even most of the malls did not make it.
quote:
Originally posted by cpthero2
I find that interesting, especially since you worked in the industry. What led you to come to that conclusion about "Burn Outs"?
[quote]
Well, Burn Outs....I've seen them forever. There were always kids that would run out and buy the new things. A lot of it was to show off. They would 'like it' as long as it was new...but nothing stays new long. Then they toss it aside.
You see this a LOT with video games: The day the video game comes out they buy it. Lock themselves away for like 50 hours play and 'beat' the game. Then show back up at the store a couple days later to trade in the used game they just bought.
A group of RPG players are just like that. Often for the 'new' game.
[quote]Originally posted by cpthero2
That is very interesting as well. Where do you source that information from?
Life.
Hundreds of people coming up to a counter and asking where the game is where they can play Drizzt that the read in a book or that Baldur's Gate city they played in a video game. |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4429 Posts |
Posted - 11 Dec 2020 : 05:47:37
|
quote:
Originally posted by bloodtide_the_red
Few wanted 4E. Not only did they not want to pay tons of money for new core rules, but they did not want a radically different game. It sold a bit at first, but dropped real fast.
So, looking back at ICv2 numbers it appears that Dungeons and Dragons (4e) held the number one selling spot until Q2 of 2011, about 6 months or so after the release of the Essentials product line and almost 3 years after it's initial release as an RPG in 2008.
Now, time is relative but by my estimation 3 years as the #1 seller shows - to me at least - it had enough popularity to show that it wasn't simply initial "new shiney" that kept it going for that long.
We can speculate til the Rothes come home, but being pretty active in the on-line community at WotC at the time, the release and subsequent misinformation/appearance of the Essentials Line of books absolutely caused a "split" and anger from that particular fan-base over it. I know a lot of people didn't buy into it, a lot of people who claimed it was 4e ".5" version and some that didn't allow it at the table for balance reasons.
Then there was the naming of the line: "Essentials". Was it essential to play 4e? What made it "Essential"? Would people already into 4E going to need this essential product for their games? It wasn't a pleasant time. I wonder how 4E would have fared as a system without all the gaffes that precludes and followed it during it's existence?
My friend worked at a FLGS in the mall and he could say that despite the owner himself hating 4E as a system, they still had lots of people running Living Forgotten Realms games at the store multiple nights a week. How popular this was, u couldn't say but it seemed to bring him business.
I truly feel 4E could've stayed on much longer had better aesthetics, names, and design styles remained more familiar (art/interior design). If they [WotC] didn't promise so much with DDI and not deliver (yes, there was a tragic murder/suicide that occurred, pretty much ending that project indefinitely), if they didn't make a video exceptionally cringe-worthy to make players of previous Editions angry, and of course alter the Realms so drastically, it would've been a much different experience overall.
Hindsight is always 20/20 |
|
|
|
cpthero2
Great Reader
USA
2285 Posts |
Posted - 11 Dec 2020 : 05:57:26
|
Learned Scribe bloodtide_the_red,
quote:
Part owner, manager, assistant manager and paid GM across a couple stores. One of my paid GM jobs was at The Game Keeper: Wizards game store, located at the mall(the enclosed kind). We set up tables in the mall-way outside the store. It was such a great way to get people walk by, see and hear and game and get interested.
Very nice. Yeah, that is some feet on the ground and getting the pulse of the people work right there.
quote:
Before 3E, sales were super low across the board for just about all RPGs. On the weekend we'd just have the one die hard Warhammer table and an empty store. Then less then a year after 3E came out, everything changed. Suddenly gaming was popular. I alone ran The Sunless Citadel at least 100 times for 100 groups.
Funny you mention that. Do you remember D&D 2.5? Skills and Powers, etc.? That completely seemed like the playtest that it turned out to be for third. It seemed to me at the time in the Army that that was about to lead to something big. I know when 3.0 hit, I was hooked! Still am to this day (PF1.0/3.5). Sunless Citadel was awesome. It was a great break-in for sure!
quote:
At first people bought 3E and then 3.5E like hotcakes. For a normal book in normal times the store would only buy say five of a new book. Buy the time the 3.0 FR campaign book came out, we got a whole box (25 books). We sold out in less then a day. Over the next couple weeks, we had a huge list of people that wanted the book. And this was before internet shopping and even 'common' cell phones.
Yeah, that's legit data there. That's crazy sales. I didn't know any shop owners at that time, specifically. It was more like around 2005 onward. I definitely remember the 4e apocalypse. haha
quote:
Few wanted 4E. Not only did they not want to pay tons of money for new core rules, but they did not want a radically different game. It sold a bit at first, but dropped real fast.
Damn. That was a crazy time. The fact that WotC just continued to lie in a way that would embarrass the Lord of Thieves, was unreal. I don't think anyone believed the sales crap they were shoveling, but they clearly went way too long with D&D 4E: The MMORPG.
Sorry to hear about the store going away, but yeah, the recession was horrid.
Best regards,
|
Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring |
|
|
|
George Krashos
Master of Realmslore
Australia
6646 Posts |
Posted - 11 Dec 2020 : 06:19:08
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
Forgotten Realms, Dragonlance, Greyhawk, etc are all trademarked brands.
WotC nominally owns them all. But at the same time they have to observe contracts and agreements with all the original content creators, to consult them and to share some credit/recognition if nothing else. The Realms is further complicated by being a crowded collaboration of many dozens or hundreds of authors over the years.
Respectfully Ayrik, that's not correct. They own that IP lock, stock and barrel and don't have to do anything in terms of "consulting" or providing "credit/recognition". Ed Greenwood hasn't written anything for WotC since Death Masks and they sure as heck don't credit the Gygax estate when they use Mordenkainen.
-- George Krashos |
"Because only we, contrary to the barbarians, never count the enemy in battle." -- Aeschylus |
|
|
|
keftiu
Senior Scribe
656 Posts |
Posted - 11 Dec 2020 : 08:43:37
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
I think it's obvious WotC would prefer to focus on a purely in-house "generic" setting than to continue emphasizing a setting which is entangled with special considerations (like, say, unusual obligations to and arrangements with Ed Greenwood). Let alone a setting which involves authors (like, say, Hickman and Weis) who might perhaps submit legal challenges (and costs) in the future.
They did this to some degree with both the generic Greyhawk-y world of 3.5, and did this explicitly in 4e with the Nentir Vale/Points of Light world, so I'm not sure what you're trying to say here; 5e has centered the Realms, and has also seen Eberron and Wildemount sell like gangbusters. There's very clearly a comfort with established settings from the suits, and a demand for them from the fanbase.
You can also see this in the "What is your favorite D&D setting?" survey they send out once or twice a year. |
4e fangirl. Here to queer up the Realms. |
Edited by - keftiu on 11 Dec 2020 08:52:55 |
|
|
|
sleyvas
Skilled Spell Strategist
USA
11701 Posts |
Posted - 11 Dec 2020 : 21:58:26
|
quote:
Originally posted by keftiu
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
I think it's obvious WotC would prefer to focus on a purely in-house "generic" setting than to continue emphasizing a setting which is entangled with special considerations (like, say, unusual obligations to and arrangements with Ed Greenwood). Let alone a setting which involves authors (like, say, Hickman and Weis) who might perhaps submit legal challenges (and costs) in the future.
They did this to some degree with both the generic Greyhawk-y world of 3.5, and did this explicitly in 4e with the Nentir Vale/Points of Light world, so I'm not sure what you're trying to say here; 5e has centered the Realms, and has also seen Eberron and Wildemount sell like gangbusters. There's very clearly a comfort with established settings from the suits, and a demand for them from the fanbase.
You can also see this in the "What is your favorite D&D setting?" survey they send out once or twice a year.
I get the Eberron thing. What all have they released for Wildemount besides the explorer's guide? I picked it up a couple months back and saw that it was a lot of reprints of racial rules. I wanted to read more of the setting stuff, but I kind of got sidetracked by the icewind dale, theros, and now Tasha's (which besides the first optional rule thing, most everything else in Tasha's I'm liking, and noting a lot of it resembles some optional rules I had put out a few years ago). I know that some people are big into their streaming campaign thing (personally, I can't get into watching other people play... it's part of why I hate watching sports too or chess competitions, etc..), but have they actually released other rules or anything? Maybe they put out a campaign setting? |
Alavairthae, may your skill prevail
Phillip aka Sleyvas |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7970 Posts |
Posted - 11 Dec 2020 : 22:16:01
|
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
Forgotten Realms, Dragonlance, Greyhawk, etc are all trademarked brands.
WotC nominally owns them all. But at the same time they have to observe contracts and agreements with all the original content creators, to consult them and to share some credit/recognition if nothing else. The Realms is further complicated by being a crowded collaboration of many dozens or hundreds of authors over the years.
Respectfully Ayrik, that's not correct. They own that IP lock, stock and barrel and don't have to do anything in terms of "consulting" or providing "credit/recognition". Ed Greenwood hasn't written anything for WotC since Death Masks and they sure as heck don't credit the Gygax estate when they use Mordenkainen.
I defer to your correction on this, you're obviously better positioned than I am to have insight on the fine details.
It's what I get for generalizing, lol. And for allowing myself to be influenced by online reviews/commentary, lol. |
[/Ayrik] |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4429 Posts |
Posted - 11 Dec 2020 : 23:01:50
|
quote:
Originally posted by keftiu
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
I think it's obvious WotC would prefer to focus on a purely in-house "generic" setting than to continue emphasizing a setting which is entangled with special considerations (like, say, unusual obligations to and arrangements with Ed Greenwood). Let alone a setting which involves authors (like, say, Hickman and Weis) who might perhaps submit legal challenges (and costs) in the future.
They did this to some degree with both the generic Greyhawk-y world of 3.5, and did this explicitly in 4e with the Nentir Vale/Points of Light world, so I'm not sure what you're trying to say here; 5e has centered the Realms, and has also seen Eberron and Wildemount sell like gangbusters. There's very clearly a comfort with established settings from the suits, and a demand for them from the fanbase.
You can also see this in the "What is your favorite D&D setting?" survey they send out once or twice a year.
Now, if we could only get them to move AWAY from the Sword Coast and to other areas of the Realms, that'd be swell. The Demon-lands of Nar and Impiltur; The Forest Kingdome of Cormyr and their conflicts with the remaining Shade forces and Sembia; the Dalelands and Cormanthyr; the Moonsea; the Unapproachable East.....literally anywhere but Neverwinter, Baldur's Gate, and Waterdeep. |
|
|
|
George Krashos
Master of Realmslore
Australia
6646 Posts |
Posted - 11 Dec 2020 : 23:36:21
|
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
Now, if we could only get them to move AWAY from the Sword Coast and to other areas of the Realms, that'd be swell. The Demon-lands of Nar and Impiltur; The Forest Kingdome of Cormyr and their conflicts with the remaining Shade forces and Sembia; the Dalelands and Cormanthyr; the Moonsea; the Unapproachable East.....literally anywhere but Neverwinter, Baldur's Gate, and Waterdeep.
They can stay well away from Impiltur, thank you.
-- George Krashos |
"Because only we, contrary to the barbarians, never count the enemy in battle." -- Aeschylus |
|
|
|
cpthero2
Great Reader
USA
2285 Posts |
Posted - 12 Dec 2020 : 00:36:27
|
Great Reader Ayrik,
Gods, if only more people had the caliber of sensibility you do to demonstrate humility, forums would be vastly better off for it, and a lot more enjoyable! :) A salute to you good sir!
Best regards,
|
Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring |
|
|
|
keftiu
Senior Scribe
656 Posts |
Posted - 12 Dec 2020 : 03:21:16
|
Not quoting because I’m on mobile and can’t format well, but this is a reply to sleyvas: the Wildemount book was a full campaign setting, detailing that continent of their world, and broke a number of sales records for WotC. They also did a third party book for another continent in the same world a few years earlier, but I can’t speak to how well it was received.
Critical Role is a big, big deal, whether me and you and everyone else likes it or not. |
4e fangirl. Here to queer up the Realms. |
|
|
|
Lord Karsus
Great Reader
USA
3738 Posts |
Posted - 12 Dec 2020 : 16:54:46
|
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
Now, if we could only get them to move AWAY from the Sword Coast and to other areas of the Realms, that'd be swell. The Demon-lands of Nar and Impiltur; The Forest Kingdome of Cormyr and their conflicts with the remaining Shade forces and Sembia; the Dalelands and Cormanthyr; the Moonsea; the Unapproachable East.....literally anywhere but Neverwinter, Baldur's Gate, and Waterdeep.
-This is something I never understood. Yeah, the focus groups and surveys say that X, Y, and Z are the most popular things so X, Y, and Z are gonna get the bulk of the limelight, but there's literally an entire world out there, 80% of which are not niche places and already hit on all of the bullet points that people generally want to see. |
(A Tri-Partite Arcanist Who Has Forgotten More Than Most Will Ever Know)
Elves of Faerûn
Vol I- The Elves of Faerûn
Vol. III- Spells of the Elves
Vol. VI- Mechanical Compendium |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 12 Dec 2020 : 22:51:53
|
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Karsus
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
Now, if we could only get them to move AWAY from the Sword Coast and to other areas of the Realms, that'd be swell. The Demon-lands of Nar and Impiltur; The Forest Kingdome of Cormyr and their conflicts with the remaining Shade forces and Sembia; the Dalelands and Cormanthyr; the Moonsea; the Unapproachable East.....literally anywhere but Neverwinter, Baldur's Gate, and Waterdeep.
-This is something I never understood. Yeah, the focus groups and surveys say that X, Y, and Z are the most popular things so X, Y, and Z are gonna get the bulk of the limelight, but there's literally an entire world out there, 80% of which are not niche places and already hit on all of the bullet points that people generally want to see.
I think a large part of it has been WotC looking at past numbers and saying "Okay, this did well before, so let's do it again!"
I think because of Hasbro that they've become so focused on the bottom line that they've become very risk-averse and unwilling to take chances on just about anything that doesn't forecast a high return on investment.
This, too, is part of why we're seeing WotC do stuff like Theros or Wildemount, or revisit older settings without updating them -- at most, they've got to invest an upfront fee, and they have a written setting, ready to go. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Returnip
Learned Scribe
221 Posts |
Posted - 12 Dec 2020 : 23:16:48
|
Theros is one of the most popular settings in MtG so it kinda makes sense to try it out in D&D for all those Vorthos players out there. ;)
And to be honest I think the idea of doing cross overs between MtG and D&D is an interesting idea with the planeswalkers showing up in the different settings. However, if they are considering writing them into the lore I think it might end up not so good. But I'm all for releasing a full size adventure in each setting where the planeswalkers are prominent characters in some way.
And since I like cross overs I can reveal that I've already created several characters from other franchises and settings in the realms. Nissa Revane from MtG, Geralt of Rivia, The Dragonborn from Skyrim and so on. The thing is to stay true to the realms flavour and the D&D rules and name it something else. That way it will at most attract a smug "I see what you did there" and then back to playing. |
On the other hand you have different fingers. |
Edited by - Returnip on 12 Dec 2020 23:17:44 |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 13 Dec 2020 : 02:33:28
|
quote:
Originally posted by Returnip
Theros is one of the most popular settings in MtG so it kinda makes sense to try it out in D&D for all those Vorthos players out there. ;)
And to be honest I think the idea of doing cross overs between MtG and D&D is an interesting idea with the planeswalkers showing up in the different settings. However, if they are considering writing them into the lore I think it might end up not so good. But I'm all for releasing a full size adventure in each setting where the planeswalkers are prominent characters in some way.
And since I like cross overs I can reveal that I've already created several characters from other franchises and settings in the realms. Nissa Revane from MtG, Geralt of Rivia, The Dragonborn from Skyrim and so on. The thing is to stay true to the realms flavour and the D&D rules and name it something else. That way it will at most attract a smug "I see what you did there" and then back to playing.
Cross-overs are fine... I just want to see something that represents some real effort on WotC's part. What they're doing now is either cherry-picking from multiple places and chucking it all into an existing pot, or they're finding something where someone else did the heavy lifting and then selling it to us.
That's what bugs me about their current strategy -- they're putting out product but not creating anything new. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
The Arcanamach
Master of Realmslore
1842 Posts |
Posted - 13 Dec 2020 : 04:31:10
|
| To be honest, I think they're scared of creating something new. The last time they took a stab at that (4e/spellplague era) it didn't go so well for them. Plus, their current strategy is working pretty well for them. That said, I have a long wishlist of things I'd like them to do (#1 being a proper FR Campaign Guide) but given that they haven't even done that for their official setting, getting something truly new seems impossible. |
I have a dream that one day, all game worlds will exist as one. |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 13 Dec 2020 : 05:56:10
|
quote:
Originally posted by The Arcanamach
To be honest, I think they're scared of creating something new. The last time they took a stab at that (4e/spellplague era) it didn't go so well for them. Plus, their current strategy is working pretty well for them. That said, I have a long wishlist of things I'd like them to do (#1 being a proper FR Campaign Guide) but given that they haven't even done that for their official setting, getting something truly new seems impossible.
The 4E Realms was not creating something new. It was taking an existing thing and turning it into something else entirely.
Actually, I've said for a while that if they'd changed the names and maps and passed it off as a different setting, the 4E Realms would have been much more well-accepted. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
keftiu
Senior Scribe
656 Posts |
Posted - 13 Dec 2020 : 09:07:47
|
| Saying that Theros and Exandria don’t count as new settings feels like goalpost-moving, to me? |
4e fangirl. Here to queer up the Realms. |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 13 Dec 2020 : 16:08:40
|
quote:
Originally posted by keftiu
Saying that Theros and Exandria don’t count as new settings feels like goalpost-moving, to me?
I'm not saying they're not new settings.
I'm saying WotC is not creating new content -- this is stuff that was already created, and in Exandria's case, it wasn't created by WotC.
The company that once created things like Dark Sun and Ravenloft and Birthright, and that added huge amounts of new content to settings like Greyhawk and the Realms, making them beloved by generations of RPG gamers, is no longer in the business of creating things itself.
If anything, I'm pointing out that WotC has moved its own goalposts -- they don't care what it takes, just so long as they can move new product. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
Edited by - Wooly Rupert on 13 Dec 2020 16:28:03 |
|
|
|
Returnip
Learned Scribe
221 Posts |
Posted - 13 Dec 2020 : 16:57:08
|
I think we should not forget that they're under pressure to make money. That means, as cpthero2 pointed out earlier, that they're more averse to risk taking, which creating new things always require.
The fact that someone created Theros before doesn't matter to me. The fact about their MtG settings is that they're often very well written, but very little lore apart from a short story and the playing cards ever come out. It didn't use to be like that. Series of novels came out for the first few settings they created, but they stopped commissioning those (probably because of lack of interest). Releasing that lore in an RPG sounds like a smart move to me. New or old, those vibrant worlds are much more at home in an RPG. |
On the other hand you have different fingers. |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 13 Dec 2020 : 18:20:51
|
quote:
Originally posted by Returnip
I think we should not forget that they're under pressure to make money. That means, as cpthero2 pointed out earlier, that they're more averse to risk taking, which creating new things always require.
The fact that someone created Theros before doesn't matter to me. The fact about their MtG settings is that they're often very well written, but very little lore apart from a short story and the playing cards ever come out. It didn't use to be like that. Series of novels came out for the first few settings they created, but they stopped commissioning those (probably because of lack of interest). Releasing that lore in an RPG sounds like a smart move to me. New or old, those vibrant worlds are much more at home in an RPG.
It wouldn't bother me if it wasn't for the fact that it's all they're doing.
If they were alternating between expanding the Realms with actual new lore and then some pre-done setting, that would be an entirely different story. Give me a book that updates Cormyr and Sembia and nearby areas, then some setting book bought from someone on Twitch, then give me a book updating Thay and Aglarond and that area, then some old setting dusted off --- something like that, I'd have no complaints.
This is beyond being risk-averse. They're not even willing to try what's worked for them in the past. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
cpthero2
Great Reader
USA
2285 Posts |
Posted - 13 Dec 2020 : 20:01:07
|
Master Arcanamach,
quote:
That said, I have a long wishlist of things I'd like them to do (#1 being a proper FR Campaign Guide) but given that they haven't even done that for their official setting, getting something truly new seems impossible.
It would be nice for those at least interested in 5e, regardless of those such as myself that will never tread there.
That being said, they have no incentive to do so. They likely need a certain volume of Realms enthusiasts or market entrant customers to partake, to make it viable, and with the split in the community such as it is, I gather that they wouldn't meet there mark. I believe you are correct: the likelihood of seeing such a product is very low. I suppose the positive of that is that it puts more of an emphasis on previous Realms lore and if people do want to get involved in the Realms, it would likely be through a 3e or prior route.
Best regards,
|
Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring |
|
|
|
cpthero2
Great Reader
USA
2285 Posts |
Posted - 13 Dec 2020 : 20:12:51
|
Master Rupert,
quote:
This is beyond being risk-averse. They're not even willing to try what's worked for them in the past.
To be clear, what I am about to comment on is purely anecdotal, and isn't predicted upon any information or data I somehow attained from the source, such as WotC.
I believe that the reason why WotC is being beyond "risk-adverse" is because it is really difficult to produce a product that with shared customer segments, that have divergent cultures in their gaming. Gamers I have watched at cons with gaming rooms, or were purely gaming cons, that had D&D available, had on average very different play styles from an older generation such as myself, to the younger ones. I'm not saying one is right or wrong; rather, that they are just different. What they are looking for in their games is predicated upon their psychographic profile being very different, i.e. lifestyles, traits, values, and more.
If you create a Forgotten Realms product that just produces to what half of that total consumer market group wants, the production costs have to be exceeded by the margins. If it isn't, it isn't a product worth making. WotC is in it to make money.
So, I don't think it is beyond risk-adverse at all. It's about COGS (Cost of Goods Sold) likely not being less than margins and that means a loss, something companies are not fond of doing.
So, when you said that "They're not even willing to try what's worked for them in the past.", that is true because market conditions are not the same as they were in the past. Consumer market segments change over time, and new ones develop. So, what the calculus was back in the day is not going to work now, more than likely. So, using the past market conditions to argue for WotC decisions in the present isn't practical.
Best regards,
|
Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring |
|
|
|
keftiu
Senior Scribe
656 Posts |
Posted - 13 Dec 2020 : 23:07:46
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by keftiu
Saying that Theros and Exandria don’t count as new settings feels like goalpost-moving, to me?
I'm not saying they're not new settings.
I'm saying WotC is not creating new content -- this is stuff that was already created, and in Exandria's case, it wasn't created by WotC.
The company that once created things like Dark Sun and Ravenloft and Birthright, and that added huge amounts of new content to settings like Greyhawk and the Realms, making them beloved by generations of RPG gamers, is no longer in the business of creating things itself.
If anything, I'm pointing out that WotC has moved its own goalposts -- they don't care what it takes, just so long as they can move new product.
I don’t understand why the MtG settings aren’t counting for you here. WotC made them and then adapted them. |
4e fangirl. Here to queer up the Realms. |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 14 Dec 2020 : 04:56:38
|
quote:
Originally posted by keftiu
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by keftiu
Saying that Theros and Exandria don’t count as new settings feels like goalpost-moving, to me?
I'm not saying they're not new settings.
I'm saying WotC is not creating new content -- this is stuff that was already created, and in Exandria's case, it wasn't created by WotC.
The company that once created things like Dark Sun and Ravenloft and Birthright, and that added huge amounts of new content to settings like Greyhawk and the Realms, making them beloved by generations of RPG gamers, is no longer in the business of creating things itself.
If anything, I'm pointing out that WotC has moved its own goalposts -- they don't care what it takes, just so long as they can move new product.
I don’t understand why the MtG settings aren’t counting for you here. WotC made them and then adapted them.
Because they weren't made to be D&D settings. They were made for another use entirely -- and then, rather than make something new, something that hadn't been seen before, they said "hey, let's just put a D&D spin on this existing thing!"
My complaint is that when it comes to D&D, they're not creating anything new -- it's either adapt this thing or take this other thing from this other setting and shove it into the Realms. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Returnip
Learned Scribe
221 Posts |
Posted - 14 Dec 2020 : 11:21:45
|
I really think using an existing setting is a good idea. It lowers the risk since it's already established and its popularity known and it's already fleshed out and they can quickly push out enough base material for it to feel "complete enough" for consumers. Smart move in my opinion.
To start building something from scratch is really hard. Not even the realms were built from scratch seeing as how Ed had already created a the details of the setting in private. Sure it's been expanded on after that, but it was already an established setting in my opinion (albeit only at Ed's gaming table) before hitting the shelves in book form.
EDIT: Back when Theros released for MtG I was still playing, and I remember wishing for more lore to come out. Alas, the days of full blown novels in the setting were long gone. |
On the other hand you have different fingers. |
Edited by - Returnip on 14 Dec 2020 11:23:22 |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4429 Posts |
Posted - 14 Dec 2020 : 15:09:35
|
I dunno, the mode in which it translates to is really different and to me, that means it's "new" regarding the nature in which it's used.
For example, when I got back into M:tG it was when Ravnica was out as a setting/expansion the first time (mid-2000's) and I thought to myself "Hot damn, this would a freaking awesome D&D setting!" To the point where I created a 4E D&D Campaign set in Ravnica, each of the players picking races/classes that aligned with their respective Guilds.
Lo and behold, a decade later, Ravnica (now out a second time in MtG format) is conformed to a D&D setting. Albeit it's not using a system I'm overly hyped about but I could easily use the information provided into other avenues of D&D-ism (like converting it to 4E easy-peasy)
I guess the point is, while it's not "From Scratch; never-before-seen" new, it IS new in how it's being used in a different medium. And not to mention is all in-house WotC product (I'm speaking about the MtG/D&D crossover).
Also lets be real here, anything WotC puts out that's "From Scratch; never-before-seen" new will most likely be considered a rip-off of something else entirely, so I feel it's a 'damned if you do, damned if you don't' deal.
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
What compinies get wrong about fans
