Most of what I see in terms of Greyhawk products currently produced by Wizards or under the D20 licence just use Greyhawk as a marginal setting. Is there a plan afoot to create a truly original Greyhawk product, like those in the past...eg. Risen from the Ashes, the Marklands, Vale of the Mage, etc. either by Wizards or one of d20 licences?**
Also, on another thread, I read about the Age of Worms being released as a complete product. Is this a rumour or does someone have confirmation from Pazio?
**I do have the Living Greyhawk Gazateer but I was thinking more in the lines of putting maybe Ivid the Undying put together as a quality product (read: errata free).
Most of what I see in terms of Greyhawk products currently produced by Wizards or under the D20 licence just use Greyhawk as a marginal setting. Is there a plan afoot to create a truly original Greyhawk product, like those in the past...eg. Risen from the Ashes, the Marklands, Vale of the Mage, etc. either by Wizards or one of d20 licences?**
Short answer: no.
WotC seems disinterested in reviving GH beyond it's support of LG and letting Erik Mona produce veiled GH adventures in Dungeon.
On AoW - no there's no confirmation from Paizo that I've heard that they're going to bundle AoW into a single hardcver as they did for Shackled City, but as it seems to be even more popular than SC, there's a good chance they will (assuming the SC hardcover did well enough to justify the investment).
The current answer is a resounding NO. Last year the WOTC product manager was posting over at the Paizo and Wizards boards.
He at first came out with several lame excuses as to why they were doing what they were doing, or not doing, with Greyhawk. He was skewered consistently by us (the fans of Greyhawk) for appearing disingenuous and less the fully forthcoming. He final admitted WOTC sees Greyhawk and Forgotten Realms as two products that are too similar.
While it may not appear so to connoisseurs such as ourselves, I can see how they would see that as non gamers. There is definitely a kernel of truth. The issue is then, should they publish twice as many products and split the fan base. They perceive that it will cost twice as much and they will pick no or only marginally more purchasers.
After some of the screaming we have heard on these boards about editions and people swearing they will never purchase a WOTC product again, one must wonder if they are right. Admittedly it has been some time since these rants have occurred.
I would note that the fortitude and candor of WOTC's staff was exceptional, as we gave them an endless rash of hell. For days. Around twenty I think. I appreciated that, even if I didn't like the answer.
To counter this, though, I have to believe that they can sell more copies of a good Greyhawk work than they can some of these half baked products we have seen in the last year. And at the rate they are turning them out, they will soon be (if not already) out of useful places to go. When this happens they may just dust off Greyhawk.
The current answer is a resounding NO. Last year the WOTC product manager was posting over at the Paizo and Wizards boards.
He at first came out with several lame excuses as to why they were doing what they were doing, or not doing, with Greyhawk. He was skewered consistently by us (the fans of Greyhawk) for appearing disingenuous and less the fully forthcoming. He final admitted WOTC sees Greyhawk and Forgotten Realms as two products that are too similar.
However, said product manager went down in the last Christmas Massacre in Renton, so there is the hope that the new one might see things differently.
Quote:
I would note that the fortitude and candor of WOTC's staff was exceptional, as we gave them an endless rash of hell. For days. Around twenty I think. I appreciated that, even if I didn't like the answer.
It should be noted that most of the "hell" given was a series of the typical editon and incarnation war complaints, primarily from people who have no intention of ever buying another Greyhawk or WotC product again in their lives. I thought it was rather unfortunate that once again the people that hate the thought of anything ever being published for the setting again that isn't written by Gygax for (1st ed.) AD&D would go out of their way to sabotage the efforts of others who do want to see the setting supported, and that they would have such an influence. As always, the worst enemy of Greyhawk is its "fans."
It should be noted that most of the "hell" given was a series of the typical editon and incarnation war complaints, primarily from people who have no intention of ever buying another Greyhawk or WotC product again in their lives. I thought it was rather unfortunate that once again the people that hate the thought of anything ever being published for the setting again that isn't written by Gygax for (1st ed.) AD&D would go out of their way to sabotage the efforts of others who do want to see the setting supported, and that they would have such an influence. As always, the worst enemy of Greyhawk is its "fans."
Actually, I disagree. The arguments were, for the most part, not edition based but were tearing apart the paper tigers floated by the WOTC staff. They made various allusions to corporate policy, to market share, to the lack of fans. They attempted to portray us as 10 or 12 really dedicated indaviduals.
After many well crafted rebutals, they admitted that the problem was semblance to FR and the fact that FR has so much more market appeal due to the books/games, etc.
There are edition wars that go on, but to be frank the lack of willingness to support past products confounds me. Why do they try and drive people to a new edition? Apparently it is not because the expense of bad hardbacks is prohibative. They could start treating all of their IP like IP and treasuring it, as opposed to exploit it.
Release a plan.. we will update all the various GH products in 3.5. For sale. Then we will re-release all 3.5 in Basic/1st Ed/2nd Ed formats in softback/pdf formats. Not with all the meat, but with the stats only. We will sell it to all of you. Then we will advance the calendar 2 years, sell some adventures and a source book, and get all your money again. Then advance the calender 2 years, sell some adventures and a new source book.. .
They could do this for GH, FR, Planescape, Darksun, etc. Use the IP, dont relegate it to some secondary status. Ask the JK Rowlings, Jordan, etc, the game mechanics are secondary. But when Wizards bought it, they didnt realize that the mechanics are the gateway to selling settings, not vice versa. After all, there are endless geeks who will do the conversion for next to no money. Me among them.
Dont get your garters tangled. They wont, they think the mechanics are the money makers and they will probably try to force another edition down out throats soon. And I doubt they are going to listen to me.
But if I was the product manager that is what I would do... bi annual releases for each setting supplemented by Dungeon and Dragon with mechanics updates every few years or so, as well as backwards conversion and forward conversion paperbacks. I would sell em what ever they wanted.
After all, with the advent of PDF, they could sell em cheap, and we know game designers dont make any money.
One reason I think why WotC seem reluctant to bring GH and the other "dead" settings out of their current coma is that they don't want to repeat the mistake that TSR made in trying to keep a half dozen settings flying at the same time. There came a point where supplements were coming out with such frequency that they were competing with each other. In short - too much supply to fill what was a falling demand at the time (this was the age of MTG and the CCG revolution).
Your bank balance is safe for the moment, I think, Celebrion.
From what I've heard from industry types, margins in RPGs are very tight. Core rulebooks are your cash cows. After that the more generic you make your non-core rulebooks the better (hence the environment and "genre" books we've seen). After that you go with one or two settings and try to keep them in the air. If you'll excuse the marketing speak - for those settings to be successful, they need to have strong brand recognition. They also need to speak to different niche genres. If you look at the settings WotC is actively supporting or licencing they are:
1: Eberron - a setting custom built for the new edition of D&D and targetting towards younger/new gamers who (a) have a more pulp/action sensibility and (b) don't find sifting through 3 editions worth of old and often OOP source material fun.
2: FR - the elephant at the cocktail party. Like it or not - a lot of people like FR. They buy the novels, they play the setting, they spend money and lots of it. And there are more of them than there are people willing to shell out for Greyhawk (and that's the bottom line for any PLC).
3: Dragonlance: much loved (though much screwed up IMO) and with a strong "identity" thanks to the novel series (if only they'd got Weis and Hickman to do a Greyhawk novel series instead of Rose frickin' Estes...what were they thinking?).
And, though, each of these is a pseudo-medieval fantasy setting - they're different enough to occupy a different niche (Eberron: Pulp ArcanaPunk; FR: Vanilla Heroic Fantasy; Dragonlance: Dragons!!!!!).
The sad fact is that to most people (and this isn't just WotC brand managers) GH and FR are as close to identical as makes no odds. Yes - there are differences - the shades of grey and the emphasis on neutrality yadda-yadda - but if you look at these objectively - they're pretty esoteric. From the perspective of the prospective customer staring at the cover of the setting book in a games store (let's assume there was a GH setting book for a minute) - there's not a whole lot of difference between the two. If you were a suit weighing up the relative value of each - you'd probably go with the setting with the vast novel line, the history of heavy investment and the track record of being a fan favourite too (and that isn't GH, sadly).
The bottom line is that unless the RPG industry enjoys a return to the levels of popularity (and profitability) that it enjoyed in the 80's WotC are unlikely to recussitate GH in glorious technicolour anytime soon. It's possible that with the changing of the guard in Renton, they might deem GH "harmless" enough to licence out (i.e. small enough that it won't rip enough market share out of FR to make FR non-viable), but I doubt that's going to happen this side of 4th Ed (since GH gods are bundled into the "Core setting").
That's the bad news.
The good news is that this means that as fans we don't have worry about terrible setting updates or world-destroying novels dropping out of orbit every six months or so.
GH is the Apple of D&D settings - the original and best, that despite its superior design, occupies only a specialist niche (or niches - inveterate world builders, old skool grognards, lovers of Sargentian inrigue and grittiness) and is worshiped by a core of extremely dedicated fans.
But GH is also the Linux of D&D settings. Because there's no WotC support, we the fans can tinker with the setting to our heart's content, happy in the knowledge that the next crappy novel about Dizzy Two-Swords the Fluffy, Friendly Drow won't drop from the sky and squash flat six months (or six years or sixteen years!) of work.
Published GH Canon (genuflects reverently) left a lot of blank space on the map of the Flanaess and the Oerth. It also left the story wide open for development into the future. That's the beauty of Greyhawk for me - filling in the blanks and broadening the canvas of the world.
That was an astute summary of the industry. I wont try and say it aint so, but remember, things change. Industries change... ask Bill Gates.
I think if WOTC started looking at their settings for their fiction value, not their game value, they would find a whole new pot of cash. Editionless is popular here, and Dragonsfoot certainly indicates the popularity of other editions. That is an underserved fan base, an unhappy customer. Period.
The sad fact is that to most people (and this isn't just WotC brand managers) GH and FR are as close to identical as makes no odds. Yes - there are differences - the shades of grey and the emphasis on neutrality yadda-yadda - but if you look at these objectively - they're pretty esoteric.
When I compared FR to GH in the early '90s, I think the bottom line reason why I went with GH was that GH had the better map. Not bigger or more colorful, just better designed, with the mountain ranges in the right places. Plus, I really liked the Mysterious Places.
But yeah, you can use a lot of FR supplements in Greyhawk, changing a few names here and there. They're not so different that they're incompatible. With the Underdark hardcover, all you need to do is change the Deep Imaskari to Deep Suel.
WS and AM both have it right IMO. I would hate it if WOTC botched a new GH release but it would have a good chance of getting my cash, but especially so if it was more about content than edition, or better yet 1ed. This last year I have spend a few hundred at NobleKnight. If the GH and/or 1ed market is big enough to justify the expense, they just need to figure out how to market it. While putting GH next to FR paper in a bookstore might not be cost effective, PDF online with targeted advertisment would not necessarily take away from FR paper sales.
OK, let's just cover this one time....1st Ed, the version I played for 23 years, IS DEAD FROM A NEW-RELEASE RETAIL STANDPOINT. Just stop already. It is over. We lost.
Unless something else happens, Greyhawk will be given over to RPGA to chop into little four hour chunks. The rest of the planet will remain remain undeveloped, and we are royaly boned.
On the plus side, you guys are putting some of the coolest stuff for the setting I have ever seen. If ya'll and Dungon are all I have left, I'll live.
kafka, to answer the question about AoW being a complete product (hardback my guess), I'd say that was their plan from the start. It is what paizo did with the Cauldron AP and they promoted it heavily at gencon. I am not sure how well it moved, I didn't buy into it being GH so I passed but I told them if the next was compiled I would buy it. That is partially why I have yet to run AoW despite having all the issues. What could be gathered from a hardback of AoW is that it would be a psuedo-GH sourcebook, especially if they combine their Wormfood articles with it. The maps of Diamond Lake, Alhaster and more might be worth it alone if you play central GH regularly.
Age of Worms should, IMO be a hardback sourcebook. I dont know how well the previous one moved either, but I have to say it was well done and worth the money.
As to 1ed. being dead, I still contend WOTC doesnt understand what they bought from TSR. They try to force everyone to upgrade to the next edition again, and they may find out. What they bought was a game that, when you buy all the books to what ever edition, you are self sufficient.
What they need to do is figure out how to sell people what they want. Sell a GH module, in 3ed., with two appendicies, one for 2nd ed, one for 1st, and go. bet they would sell a ton.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Canonfire! is a production of the Thursday Group in assocation with GREYtalk and Canonfire! Enterprises