|
Takasi, I see you complain about this here, and other boards, and I have always kept my mouth shut, but this is too much, my friend. Part of a GM's work is converting these things to their own tastes. Can they provide conversion notes to all the homebrew worlds etc...? No! So set the darn thing on Xen'Drik or wherever and let's move off this damn topic again. James said there will be extensive conversion notes, so let it drop. Whew!!
Part of a GM's work is converting these things to their own tastes.
I hear this a lot, but honestly does a GM really need Dungeon at all to run a good campaign? Of course not. In fact, I'd be willing to bet there are more D&D tables out there doing their own thing than there are tables running modules from Dungeon. Does that mean the GMs using Dungeon aren't doing "part of their work"? Of course not. Dungeon is there to help the GM.
I'm thinking about running Savage Tide on Athas. Could you do me up some adaptation notes please?
Try athas.org or the WotC boards. I don't think WotC would even let Paizo do this, even if they wanted to and it was feasible to do.
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
I hear this a lot, but honestly does a GM really need Dungeon at all to run a good campaign? Of course not. In fact, I'd be willing to bet there are more D&D tables out there doing their own thing than there are tables running modules from Dungeon. Does that mean the GMs using Dungeon aren't doing "part of their work"? Of course not. Dungeon is there to help the GM.
Can't...help...self...
A newspaper is there to keep you informed, and yet I don't write the Wall Street Journal every day complaining about their inadequate coverage of American Idol.
Sadly, the market for D&D magazines is not large enough to satisfy every particular niche. If the market is with you, I'm certain Dungeon will change (or else risk folding).
But in the meantime, could you maybe, possibly, just consider becoming acquainted with perspective as to the scope of your opinion. Try the following:
"I feel put off by the use of Greyhawk locations" instead of "Most/All Eberron/FR DM's feel put off by the use of Greyhawk locations."
"I find the Eberron conversions to be inadequate because of reason X, Y, and Z" instead of "the Eberron conversions are inadequate because Paizo hates Eberron and puppies."
And, of course:
"I wish Dungeon had more good Eberron adventures. I wish the conversion notes were better. Perhaps I will submit some or post my own conversion notes here on these lovely message boards" instead of "OMG!1!1!!! There is an evil conspiracy at Paizo against Eberron, a secret burning hatred that causes the editors to lie at every turn! Beware their poison words!!!"
That's all. Carry on.
Avast! I personally canna' wait fer the adaptation notes. I really like the idea of the setting designers getting 'down and dirty' with ideas for the setting. I don't /need/ them, and quite often I don't see it necessary (for example, my SCAP is in the Vilhon Reach, not Chult) but I do like having the information /and/ the information allows me to springboard into other story ideas.
Plus I like it when my concepts match up with the designers. It makes me feel tingly inside. (Or is that the ale?)
I think everything else that needs to be said has been said. Takasi's fortitude is not in question, but bickering on what I consider to be some of the friendliest forums in InternetLand (and far less moderated than ENy-one else) doesn't really put an end to the issue.
I. Can't. Wait.
Big apes. Dinosaurs. Ankylosauruses high on wacky-weed! Black pearls! Bare-breasted voodoo shamans! Jungle Fever! PCs complaining that THIS IS TOO MUCH ROCK FOR JUST ONE MAGAZINE!
(This will all be ruined when the first PC takes the Portal Creation Feat and just walks back and forth from the mainland. Just sayin'...)
|
I just want to say I've been getting Dungeons on and off for 12 years or so. I started reading them in A. I. T. in the Army as a diversion. I've converted Dungeon adventures to three different game systems. I converted one to Cyberpunk, just to see if I could pull it off.
The fact is, sometimes I try to think up an adventure, and yoiks...nothin. Pull out a Dungeon, and you're cranking again. And the adventures invariably springboard something just by reading them, much less gaming them out.
EB/GH/FR--all the same system. Not too difficult to pull off.
It's not Paizo's responsibility to support every game world all the time. It's kind of a copout, really.
And I think the Dark Sun devotees have infinitely more to gripe about than any Eberron fans who feel put out.
That's my 2 cents.
And I think the Dark Sun devotees have infinitely more to gripe about than any Eberron fans who feel put out.
I'm just a devout D&D supporter of WotC material (including Eberron), and I think Paizo should represent our generation of game designers and campaign worlds. Dark Sun's time has come and gone. If one day WotC decides to revive it then we should expect a few Dungeon adventures to support it. For example, I'd be a little surprised if there isn't a Ravenloft adventure after this fall.
If WotC stops supporting Eberron and publishes something else (perhaps 4E will be the dawn of Rich Burlew's setting) I'll probably move along with them and you won't hear me asking for Eberron adaptations. Until then we are firmly in the Age of Eberron, and Paizo is obligated to tip their hat. Greyhawk, Dark Sun, Planescape, Birthright, Spelljammer and Mystara are nothing like they were at their peaks, and even nostalgia can't hide the fact that these settings (and to a lesser extend D&D) as they once were have disappeared from store shelves, perhaps forever.
I support professional game designers, and right now Forgotten Realms and Eberron are the only two campaign worlds that WotC is paying for D&D world design and development.
|
|
Ergo by that argument they should probably adapt the whole thing into a Magic: The Gathering card set. The whole pen and paper thing is going the way of the dinosaur anyway. A dinosaur ridden by a halfling. And Paizo better come correct, because we Eberroners are the next generation, and we don't cotton to adapting adventures like those old Yahtzee-playing codgers.
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
I'm just a devout D&D supporter of WotC material (including Eberron), and I think Paizo should represent our generation of game designers and campaign worlds.
Who is this "our" you reference? Do you have a frog in your pocket?
Until then we are firmly in the Age of Eberron, and Paizo is obligated to tip their hat.
And this "obligation" arises from what source exactly?
I'm just a devout D&D supporter of WotC material (including Eberron), and I think Paizo should represent our generation of game designers and campaign worlds.Who is this "our" you reference? Do you have a frog in your pocket?
You're right, I'm the only person buying D&D material from game designers between 2000-2006+. "Our generation" are the gamers who buy and use 3rd edition and 3.5 products.
Until then we are firmly in the Age of Eberron, and Paizo is obligated to tip their hat.And this "obligation" arises from what source exactly?
Wizards of the Coast.
Ergo by that argument they should probably adapt the whole thing into a Magic: The Gathering card set.
If they did do this then it would define this era of D&D. What WotC does determines the direction of D&D. I'm not on WotC's boards asking them to change. I'm on Paizo's boards asking for support for the current shape of D&D, which is, to some respect, Eberron.
|
|
Gwydion wrote: "...Takasi's fortitude is not in question..."
Perhaps a cameo as a deluded, Eberron-fixated extraplanar sage was hasty. I think a small rabbit-shaped construct of some kind complete with a bass drum, permanent freedom of movement, and a +55 Fortitude save is in order...
*Quickly puts his tinderbox away, and discards his enormous kobold-skin bellows*
|
|
I nominate myself as spokesman for the entire generation of game buyers from 2000-2006. In true pirate democratic spirit, all for me sez ye 'arr.' All for Takazi, sez ye 'yarr.'
An oy promis ye' rich plunder and much grog and carousin,' an if oy lose, oy proomise oy'll take a long walk down short Jonny Plank, in ye'll ne'er git marr o' moy yap tibbotherye.
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
I'm just a devout D&D supporter of WotC material (including Eberron), and I think Paizo should represent our generation of game designers and campaign worlds.Who is this "our" you reference? Do you have a frog in your pocket?You're right, I'm the only person buying D&D material from game designers between 2000-2006+. "Our generation" are the gamers who buy and use 3rd edition and 3.5 products.
Ahhh...I missed the part where "we" elected you to be our spokesperson.
Or, maybe I'm just in the minority of "our" generation, seeing as how I don't share your view on Eberron.
And I guess all the all the other posters on this board must be in the minority.
And all the other posters on ENWorld.
And all the other posters on Wizards.
You would think that if your opinion was universally held by "our" generation, it would be a lot more common.
Weird.
Wizards of the Coast.Until then we are firmly in the Age of Eberron, and Paizo is obligated to tip their hat.And this "obligation" arises from what source exactly?
You've lost me. Can you please show me evidence of this obligation. Something small, like a legal document. I know you're not referring to Paizo's license, because you haven't seen it.
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
I nominate myself as spokesman for the entire generation of game buyers from 2000-2006. In true pirate democratic spirit, all for me sez ye 'arr.' All for Takazi, sez ye 'yarr.'
An oy promis ye' rich plunder and much grog and carousin,' an if oy lose, oy proomise oy'll take a long walk down short Jonny Plank, in ye'll ne'er git marr o' moy yap tibbotherye.
I second the nomination - but only if you fight for my right to have Paizo publish adventures exclusively for the Redsteel campaign setting and only in pirate-ese.
|
|
I second the nomination - but only if you fight for my right to have Paizo publish adventures exclusively for the Redsteel campaign setting and only in pirate-ese.
Oy kin promise ye that AND a turnip in evvry pot! But ye may have to put up with the odd Dark Sun adventure....one every two years or so. Mul it over.
When I get in a debate and the other side doesn't get the point after repeated attempts, I conclude one of two things:
1) I might be wrong.
2) They can't be convinced.
Either way, I give up. It's polite, it's gracious, and it doesn't offend every single person listening to my incessant rambling. Nobody wants to listen to rude, stubborn people (whether they're right or wrong).
Regards all,
Jack
|
|
I think it would be great if there was an Easter Egg encounter in Savage Tide where you could encounter a lost and deluded extra-planar sage hailing from Morgrave University named Takasi...
/SNIP
You know, I may just have to use that... :D
Seriously, I remember Takasi from way back on the Eberron boards, though I wouldn't blame him for not knowing me, as I've become a bit of a lurker in the almost two years since Eberron came out. I think he's a great guy. But I think it would be interesting for my players to meet up with Takasi, Sage of Morgrave in Sasserine. They wouldn't get it, but I would, and that would make it all the sweeter.
No offense meant, Takasi, and I hope none taken. I'd be flattered if I showed up in someone's adventure as a character- as long as its not as the bottom man on a kobold-kebab. Mmm. Them kobolds is good eatin'.
You would think that if your opinion was universally held by "our" generation, it would be a lot more common.
When I say "our generation" I'm stating facts. Looking back from the future, the simply truth is that between 2000-2006 D&D was run by WotC and was represented by three major professional worlds: Forgotten Realms, Eberron and Greyhawk. (There will also be a lot of cool side notes about the 3rd party publishers for d20 and maybe a thing or two about Kalamar and Warcraft.)
I think you're reading something into my statements that I'm not seeing.
You've lost me. Can you please show me evidence of this obligation. Something small, like a legal document. I know you're not referring to Paizo's license, because you haven't seen it.
"Trademarks related to the Dungeons and Dragons brand, including Dragon, Dungeon and D&D are trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc. and are used under license from Wizards of the Coast, Inc, a division of Hasbro, Inc."
Whatever the state of D&D is in, WotC is ultimately in charge of all of it. Paizo must at least tip their hat to whatever direction WotC steers the ship.
I made this post politely and constructively, with a little bit of info on Eberron and suggestions. I'm asking for information on the Amedio Jungle and the Abyss, and for others to offer suggestions. I LIKED the conversion notes very much, and I have never said they were poor or insufficient. I would like to see the practice continue, and it sounds like Paizo does too. Some people in this thread said they don't want to see conversion notes at all, whatever. My other suggestion is to do it as a web enhancement through the web (similar to the previews instead of pdf), as I believe the pdf might be more difficult to make. That's the bulk of my posts on this thread in a nutshell. If anyone disagrees with anything in this paragraph I'd love to hear what it is.
Thank you N'wah, I think I remember you. Didn't you have the star avatar?
Either way, I give up. It's polite, it's gracious, and it doesn't offend every single person listening to my incessant rambling.
There will be years of new players finding this site for the first time, and I'm always going to be available to hear their perspectives and discuss issues with them, whether it's related to Eberron, the Adventure Paths or whatever. If you don't like what I'm saying please don't read my threads, let alone post on them.
But ye may have to put up with the odd Dark Sun adventure....one every two years or so. Mul it over.
A tax! A pun tax upon thee! You punny guy you...
Senior Software Developer
|
I'm not going to get into the Eberron thing because I'm just the paizo.com codemonkey and don't know squat about magical robots and ninja pirates and whatnot, but I'd like to insert some good advice that I swiped from another site:
"Help maintain a healthy, respectful discussion by focusing comments on the issues, topics, and facts at hand -- not at other members of the site."
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
When I say "our generation" I'm stating facts. Looking back from the future, the simply truth is that between 2000-2006 D&D was run by WotC and was represented by three major professional worlds: Forgotten Realms, Eberron and Greyhawk. (There will also be a lot of cool side notes about the 3rd party publishers for d20 and maybe a thing or two about Kalamar and Warcraft.)
I think you're reading something into my statements that I'm not seeing.
And when I look back on "our" generation, I see the amazing work of Paizo, the adventure paths, and the rebirth of greyhawk. I see Eberron as the same flash in the same pan as Darksun, Spelljammer, and Planescape.
I'm not the only one that reads factual assertions into your opinions. Maybe the problem is not my reading comprehension, but your ability to communicate effectively. Again, might I suggest not making statements that imply that you speak for the preferences and future memories of an entire generation. That might clear up my confusion.
"Trademarks related to the Dungeons and Dragons brand, including Dragon, Dungeon and D&D are trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc. and are used under license from Wizards of the Coast, Inc, a division of Hasbro, Inc."
A. This is not a legal obligation. B. This doesn't say anything about what the license says. It may just say "if you use our trademarks, don't spell them wrong." It might say "publish anything in any of our worlds, just get our permission on big stuff first." It might say "do what you want." Those would be obligations.
Whatever the state of D&D is in, WotC is ultimately in charge of all of it. Paizo must at least tip their hat to whatever direction WotC steers the ship.
The customer is in charge. WotC can switch all their roleplaying into the My Little Pony rpg tomorrow and watch their sales tank. Paizo sure isn't going to follow that ship.
Further, as has been posted ad naseum, subscriptions to Dungeon are up. The magazine is experiencing tremendous success catering to the Greyhawk crowd. Those are facts. They are objective and measurable.
I made this post politely and constructively, with a little bit of info on Eberron and suggestions. I'm asking for information on the Amedio Jungle and the Abyss, and for others to offer suggestions. I LIKED the conversion notes very much, and I have never said they were poor or insufficient. I would like to see the practice continue, and it sounds like Paizo does too. Some people in this thread said they don't want to see conversion notes at all, whatever. My other suggestion is to do it as a web enhancement through the web (similar to the previews instead of pdf), as I believe the pdf might be more difficult to make. That's the bulk of my posts on this thread in a nutshell. If anyone disagrees with anything in this paragraph I'd love to hear what it is.
It's all in presentation. You never just say "this is what I'd like to see" or "this would work best." You say "Paizo should do it this way. I know what D&D players want and it's eberron."
Seriously, go into law. You've got a gift. If you can polish off your persuasive skills so that you can present your own case, your cross-x skills will cary you the rest of the way.
All I want is for some respect for those that don't think Eberron is the wave of the future. If you can do that and make your point, not only will you be more effective at communicating your message, you won't get so many rabid responses.
Edit: Sorry Gary. I suppose all points have been made and ignored. I'm done.
|
|
Thank you N'wah, I think I remember you. Didn't you have the star...
I think my Wizards avatar was "The Cheese Stands Alone" from Magic's Unglued expansion, but I might have changed it. Big grinning wedge of cheese dressed like a superhero. It's been forever since I actually logged on over there- I gave up when the "Ask Keith" posts became overgrown with the same questions over and over again, making looking for new information almost impossible.
And when I look back on "our" generation, I seen the amazing work of Paizo, the adventure paths, and the rebirth of greyhawk. I see Eberron as the same flash in the same pan as Darksun, Spelljammer, and Planescape.
I mentioned Greyhawk. However you look back on things, when people ask the question: "What D&D worlds were introduced and heavily promoted in 3rd and 3.5 edition?" the answer is Greyhawk, Eberron and Forgotten Realms. It isn't Dark Sun, or Planescape, or whatever other setting people might be asking Paizo to create conversions for. It doesn't matte what your opinion or perspective is, this is just a fact of our generation.
You took my statement out of context a little too. I also meant that these are the worlds of Keith Baker, Rich Burlew and other younger authors in my age bracket. Everyone who has ever contributed to the professional D&D works of the 70's, 80's and 90's are probably not in "my generation" (25-35). It is a sense of identity and culture of this age. What game was played at the 30th anniversary gameday? What game was played as the 2004-2006 D&D Opens? Who were the D&D guest speakers at the cons of the age? What worlds were they discussing? Whether you think something is a flash in the pan or not, you cannot deny the flash.
I'm not the only one that reads factual assertions into your opinions. Maybe the problem is not my reading comprehension, but your ability to communicate effectively. Again, might I suggest not making statements that imply that you speak for the preferences and future memories of an entire generation. That might clear up my confusion.
Perhaps. If you don't like me or how I'm posting, please report any code of conduct violations to the moderators or send me a private message. Post to discuss what is posted, not necessarily how it's posted (save that for moderators or PMs).
A. This is not a legal obligation.
I never said it was legal.
B. This doesn't say anything about what the license says. It may just say "if you use our trademarks, don't spell them wrong." It might say "publish anything in any of our worlds, just get our permission on big stuff first." It might say "do what you want." Those would be obligations.
Whether I can prove it to you or not, I know that all of the adventures in Dungeon must be approved by WotC. I also know that WotC influences their decisions to a certain degree.
The customer is in charge. WotC can switch all their roleplaying into the My Little Pony rpg tomorrow and watch their sales tank. Paizo sure isn't going to follow that ship.
If they want to keep the D&D logo, and the name of the magazine, they will. Paizo can stop publishing Dungeon and publish another generic d20 magazine, but if WotC tells them to put My Little Pony on the cover or they'll love their license then they have no other choice.
All I want is for some respect for those that don't think Eberron is the wave of the future.
Eberron is the wave of the foreseeable future of D&D products. Until WotC says otherwise, there's no reason for anyone to assert otherwise.
I think my Wizards avatar was "The Cheese Stands Alone" from Magic's Unglued expansion, but I might have changed it. Big grinning wedge of cheese dressed like a superhero. It's been forever since I actually logged on over there- I gave up when the "Ask Keith" posts became overgrown with the same questions over and over again, making looking for new information almost impossible.
Yes I remember the grin. For some reason I was thinking of a modron like smiling star/hero.
|
|
Ergo by that argument they should probably adapt the whole thing into a Magic: The Gathering card set.If they did do this then it would define this era of D&D. What WotC does determines the direction of D&D. I'm not on WotC's boards asking them to change. I'm on Paizo's boards asking for support for the current shape of D&D, which is, to some respect, Eberron.
No, it is not what WotC does, it is what we, the players do that determines the direction of the hobby. Sorry pal!!
No, it is not what WotC does, it is what we, the players do that determines the direction of the hobby. Sorry pal!!
On a professional level consumers don't make decisions on the direction of D&D. Buyers can decide if those directions succeed or fail, but they don't steer the ship. If WotC wanted to revitalize Spelljammer next year there's absolutely nothing the end user can do to stop that. D&D is their intellectual property, not ours, and only they can hire designers and artists, put up displays, events and seminars at the major cons and gamedays, market the material, and require the license holders of the Dungeon magazine name to follow their lead to whatever extent they choose. From a historical perspective, 2007 would be the year that D&D heavily promoted Spelljammer. Buyers can decide if this strategy is profitable, but the decision makers at WotC have control over what the history books will say about professional game design for D&D. In fact, if WotC sold the rights of D&D tomorrow to an insane billionaire hobbyist then he could publish whatever he wants and that would be the new (disturbing) face of professional D&D material. Players have no power to stop what WotC does with the intellectual rights of D&D.
|
|
No, it is not what WotC does, it is what we, the players do that determines the direction of the hobby. Sorry pal!!On a professional level consumers don't make decisions on the direction of D&D. Buyers can decide if those directions succeed or fail, but they don't steer the ship.
The direction of where the ship goes, as well as the direction of the hobby itsself, is ultimately determined by the consumer. WOTC can steer the ship all it wants, but where the ship ultimately berths (good portage or the bottom of the sea) is entirely in the hands of the consumer. So the players do determine the direction of the hobby through market forces; the direction of the hobby ends up entirely in their control.
The direction of where the ship goes, as well as the direction of the hobby itsself, is ultimately determined by the consumer. WOTC can steer the ship all it wants, but where the ship ultimately berths (good portage or the bottom of the sea) is entirely in the hands of the consumer. So the players do determine the direction of the hobby through market forces; the direction of the hobby ends up entirely in their control.
Customer demand is diverse. WotC decides what market they want to cater to, whether it's people who like Greyhawk, Spelljammer, or Buck Rogers. They can also influence the market through advertising. And ultimately it's their intellectual property and the fact is that they can do whatever they want with the license and there's nothing you can do to stop it. You can try to influence their decision by opting not to purchase their product, but ultimately it's their decision on what (if anything) to sell. The history of professional D&D design development is in their hands.
Once upon a time, in a land not so far away, I played D&D.
I was a member of the D&D community. My characters explored and adventured in a wonderful world. Greyhawk? Yes, but that's really all there was back then. Would my memories be better or worse if I was in FR or Eb? No, just different.
Temple of Elemental Evil, Queen of the Demon Web Pits, Against the Giants.
Does their world make them special? No. They were great adventures. I had fun. Everyone in my group had fun. Most importantly for the game, everyone in other groups had fun. I can talk about those adventures with people across the globe, because we all played them. Some where set in Greyhawk some in homebrews. It doesn't matter.
The work Paizo is doing with the APs is reforging the D&D community through shared experiences. This is so much more important than what world they support. I remember that swarm coming for me in the Cairn, not what pantheon the clerc's god was from.
Just play the adventures. Have fun. We'll talk.
|
|
Customer demand is diverse. WotC decides what market they want to cater to, whether it's people who like Greyhawk, Spelljammer, or Buck Rogers. They can also influence the market through advertising. And ultimately it's their intellectual property and the fact is that they can do whatever they want with the license and there's nothing you can do to stop it. You can try to influence their decision by opting not to purchase their product, but ultimately it's their decision on what (if anything) to sell. The history of professional D&D design development is in their hands.
So by your own roughly defined Skinnerian/Pavlovian theorem on market behavior, WoTC put Dark Sun to bed, not market forces; ergo Athas fans have more to whine about than Eberron fans. Therefore, you've proven my original point. It took you a while, but thankyou.
The work Paizo is doing with the APs is reforging the D&D community through shared experiences. This is so much more important than what world they support. I remember that swarm coming for me in the Cairn, not what pantheon the clerc's god was from.
I think that's very well said, man.
I love the APs as well, and I think it does show that we all really enjoy the shared experience. Twenty years from now, crusty old gamers are still going to be swapping stories about how they killed Dragotha, or laugh about their experiences at Prince Zeech's party. They won't remember what campagin world they were in, or the implications that Redhand's liberation will have on Iuz, the shield lands, or the duchy of. . . wherever.
Granted, DMs do care about setting, that's true. But I'm starting to learn that this isn't really important to the game. . . it's just a particular fetish of being a DM.
So by your own roughly defined Skinnerian/Pavlovian theorem on market behavior, WoTC put Dark Sun to bed, not market forces; ergo Athas fans have more to whine about than Eberron fans. Therefore, you've proven my original point. It took you a while, but thankyou.
You're right; you have a lot more to complain about than adaptation notes for a setting that no longer receives professional design. Your best bet is to go to Athas.org or the campaigns-no-longer-supported community on the WotC boards.
The work Paizo is doing with the APs is reforging the D&D community through shared experiences. This is so much more important than what world they support. I remember that swarm coming for me in the Cairn, not what pantheon the clerc's god was from.
I think that's very well said, man.
I love the APs as well, and I think it does show that we all really enjoy the shared experience. Twenty years from now, crusty old gamers are still going to be swapping stories about how they killed Dragotha, or laugh about their experiences at Prince Zeech's party. They won't remember what campagin world they were in, or the implications that Redhand's liberation will have on Iuz, the shield lands, or the duchy of. . . wherever.
I agree. That's what I've been telling my friends. The AP are doing what the original adventures did - creating a setting, not out of lots and lots and lots of fluff, but out of the adventures themselves. I've been steering clear of AoW, but from what I've seen it gives you the following:
-A location
-A reason for the PCs to be there
-A history behind the location
-A loose tie to other, similar locations
Does this sound familiar? It does to me. It sounds like spider queens, and giant battles, and temples with evil elementals, and traitors who escape to the deserts of the world.
It sounds an awful lot like the D&D I grew up with, and /that/ D&D had dungeons with plenty of empty rooms for the DM to flesh out...a lot like Jzadirune.
In my eyes, Cauldron is this new era's Hommlet. That sums it up for me. =0
|
|
You're right; you have a lot more to complain about than adaptation notes for a setting that no longer receives professional design. Your best bet is to go to Athas.org or the campaigns-no-longer-supported community on the WotC boards.
Also, your entire purpose for starting this thread is made moot by your own admission that WOTC talks and PAIZO walks. Neither of them even care what you think; the market will just react to their wise decisions. So you can feel free to take a breather; you don't have to rally for Eberron, WOTC has it all figured out anyway. And all the little Eberronites will eat it all up like hungry baby birds, and Takasi can finally rest.
I remember that swarm coming for me in the Cairn, not what pantheon the clerc's god was from.
While I do believe the Adventure Paths are a great way of building a shared D&D experience regardless of the world chosen, I am much less likely to run it if it doesn't take published D&D campaign worlds into consideration. These worlds make it easier on the DM and players to build back stories and facilitate open ended play.
Your players might not care what pantheon the cleric's god was from, but my players do. My players want to be warforged and kalashtar and have interesting backstories. They want some player centric ties to the plot. In addition to memories of Raknian, Zeech and Dragotha they're also going to have memories of their own characters. Even the memories of the the NPCs are going to be a little different.
SPOILER:
In your Eberron campaign, how did your players react when they found out that Manzorian was actually a gold dragon in disguise?
The similarities will bring players together, but it's the differences that make good conversation. Whether it's tactical differences, or playing a scout versus a rogue, or the use of psionics, or the choice of Eberron, FR, Greyhawk or whatever, these differences are what make each group unique. They are no less memorable than the shared experiences are.
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
So by your own roughly defined Skinnerian/Pavlovian theorem on market behavior, WoTC put Dark Sun to bed, not market forces; ergo Athas fans have more to whine about than Eberron fans. Therefore, you've proven my original point. It took you a while, but thankyou.
You've got it all wrong! Wizards no longer supports Darksun, therefore there are no longer any Darksun fans out there. If you think you are a Darksun fan, you're wrong. If you think Darksun is a better setting than a currently supported setting, you're wrong.
Let me help you out. It's simple really.
Take a look at the settings supported by WotC. Determine 1) their relevant positing in the market, 2) the level of support WotC gives to them and 3) the general popularity of the setting. Don't worry if you don't have data, assertions will suffice.
Once you've done that "analysis," the next step is to change your preferences and buying habits to the settings in proportion to their support by WotC.
Now, if you want to take your support of the hobby to the next level, you need to use logic and reasoning to prove your conclusions to non-believers. Don't be upset if they are resistant to your tactics and find your "facts" to be questionable. Once they are exposed to the truth, they will come around.
Final step - await further instruction from WotC.
Once you take these simple steps, you will realize that you don't really miss Darksun after all and that an unsupported setting is not as good as a supported setting.
Edit: Dang! I thought I said I was done.
Also, your entire purpose for starting this thread is made moot by your own admission that WOTC talks and PAIZO walks. Neither of them even care what you think; the market will just react to their wise decisions. So you can feel free to take a breather; you don't have to rally for Eberron, WOTC has it all figured out anyway. And all the little Eberronites will eat it all up like hungry baby birds, and Takasi can finally rest.
Ah, but they also have the freedom to listen if they so choose. WotC and Paizo have been receptive, so I'm free to voice my opinion. As you said earlier, if you're interested in Athas you have more to ask for than conversion notes from Paizo. This should be very low on your priority list of professional design preferences.
Once you take these simple steps, you will realize that you don't really miss Darksun after all and that an unsupported setting is not as good as a supported setting.
You're kidding, but some of what you said is true. Consumer interest in Dark Sun isn't anything close to what it would be if professional quality sourcebooks, adventures and ancillary products (video games, miniatures, convention promotions, etc) for the setting were available.
Also, you can be a fan of past Dark Sun professional products but you cannot be a fan of current Dark Sun professional products if there are none.
|
|
Ah, but they also have the freedom to listen if they so choose. WotC and Paizo have been receptive, so I'm free to voice my opinion.
But you have to agree with me that, according to your own words, even if they do listen, your opinion is ultimately immaterial, if the market has no control whatsoever of the direction of the ship. I'm just seeking clarification.
But you have to agree with me that, according to your own words, even if they do listen, your opinion is ultimately immaterial, if the market has no control whatsoever of the direction of the ship. I'm just seeking clarification.
If they are willing to listen then what we say is material. It's their decision to listen though.
For example, let's say I'm a private d20 publisher and I've come up with a new setting I really like. If I want to I can create a message board and ask people for input, or I can do my own thing. No matter what people want to do with my setting it's my choice to do whatever I want with it. If I want to create a new meta plot where the moon explodes then that's what happens. It doesn't matter what you do or say does it?
Intellectual property is not democratically controlled. No one voted on whether Jar Jar would be added to the Star Wars universe. Changes are made based on the decision of the license holder. We can try to influence the decision, but it's their decision not ours.
|
|
If they are willing to listen then what we say is material. It's their decision to listen though.
Oh, I agree with you in this one instance 100%. All I am saying is many of your own arguments don't agree with you 100%.
They clash with eachother, and ultimately with your own goal in starting this thread.
Oh, I agree with you in this one instance 100%. All I am saying is many of your own arguments don't agree with you 100%.
They clash with eachother, and ultimately with your own goal in starting this thread.
How so?