| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| SiriusBlack |
Posted - 24 Feb 2005 : 05:08:11
I found some interesting comments from Richard Baker at GamingReport.Com. Below is the information from the story:
quote:
When asked by a fan why more detail has been left out of Forgotten Realms RPG books WotC's Richard Baker had this to say:
"Sorry, but that's the business team's decision. We can't produce gigantic FR sourcebooks and hit the targets that we're given. I agree it would be better to write 250,000 words on Lost Empires than 150,000
words, but I can't argue that a 320-page sourcebook is a good idea from a business standpoint. We'd have to charge more, it would use up more of our design and graphics resources, and we'd likely sell less.
The natural response would be, Don't try to cover too much in one book, then! But here's the deal: FR books already appeal to only a slice of the D&D core audience; if we sub-divide topics to be extremely thorough on each one, we risk appealing to only a slice of a slice, if you take my meaning. That's why books such as Races of Faerun or Lost Empires deliberately cover the "whole" topic in not-very-great-depth, as opposed to tackling a more limited topic in greater depth.
I know that's not the answer you'd like to hear, but I'm just trying to be square with you.
Rich Baker
Senior Designer
Roleplaying R&D
|
| 20 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Faraer |
Posted - 08 Mar 2005 : 12:03:09
Wouldn't it be the worst of both worlds? Wouldn't contribute to Realmslore, wouldn't be useful as an illustration for Realms DMs, but would restrict its own sales needlessly.
But I'm pretty sure Rich Baker and Erik Mona both know that a Realms adventure means more than the proper names, and I've done my bit to make sure they do. Linking adventures with 'the main events of the Realms', though, has come under criticism too ('main events' being a contentious idea to start with). |
| SiriusBlack |
Posted - 02 Mar 2005 : 02:48:02
quote:
Originally posted by Reefy
The optimistic streak in me (god knows where it suddenly came from) wonders why they'd bother packaging it as FR if it was just going to be an essentially generic adventure.
Because they would then have the best of both worlds. |
| Reefy |
Posted - 02 Mar 2005 : 01:49:24
quote:
Originally posted by SiriusBlack
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
That's a good idea... It makes the modules a lot more sellable to everyone, Realms-fans and non-Realms-fans alike. Thank you for sharing that with us.
And here I worry that the adventures will be as generic as the web adventures we get every few weeks.
The optimistic streak in me (god knows where it suddenly came from) wonders why they'd bother packaging it as FR if it was just going to be an essentially generic adventure. But I do understand your concern. |
| SiriusBlack |
Posted - 01 Mar 2005 : 23:13:46
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
That's a good idea... It makes the modules a lot more sellable to everyone, Realms-fans and non-Realms-fans alike. Thank you for sharing that with us.
And here I worry that the adventures will be as generic as the web adventures we get every few weeks. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 01 Mar 2005 : 23:05:12
quote:
Originally posted by kuje31
Actually he said it wouldn't tie in with major events cause a lot of us don't like that.
That's a good idea... It makes the modules a lot more sellable to everyone, Realms-fans and non-Realms-fans alike. Thank you for sharing that with us. |
| Dahran |
Posted - 01 Mar 2005 : 18:48:47
Kuje31, you just made my day friend! It will be great once Wizards of the Coast start producing adventure modules once more. Though I have enjoyed the relative few that have been released I would think they would make smaller adventures, like those originally released by Wizards of the Coast when D&D 3.0 was released and even the current Ebberon modules, not to mention the classic TSR modules of days gone by. Having a epic adventure in your hands waiting to be played is great like City of the Spider Queen, but isn't needed all the time. It would probably make more sense for the to release larger modules has a series, but other wise keep it simple has mentioned above. Thank you once again for the great news!  |
| Kuje |
Posted - 01 Mar 2005 : 18:44:20
quote:
Originally posted by SirUrza
Well hopefully Rich et al has read the critism and will make sure there adventure modules have something to do with the main events of the Realms instead of some stray $35 who's events have nothing to do with the current plots or available source materials. Cheaper paper and less color would make it more desirable to non-DMs (since that's what makes it $10 more then everyone else.) :)
Actually he said it wouldn't tie in with major events cause a lot of us don't like that. I know that's why I'll never run the Spider Queen adventure. If I buy FR modules then I DO NOT want them tied into major events because MY FR is not WOTC's FR and I don't use RSE's! |
| SirUrza |
Posted - 01 Mar 2005 : 18:33:30
quote:
Originally posted by kuje31
BTW WOTC has decided to start making FR adventures and core adventures again. Rich said there is supposed to be one released for FR later this year. :)
Well hopefully Rich et al has read the critism and will make sure there adventure modules have something to do with the main events of the Realms instead of some stray $35 who's events have nothing to do with the current plots or available source materials. Cheaper paper and less color would make it more desirable to non-DMs (since that's what makes it $10 more then everyone else.) :) |
| Kuje |
Posted - 01 Mar 2005 : 17:03:05
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Rad
quote:
Originally posted by kuje31
BTW WOTC has decided to start making FR adventures and core adventures again. Rich said there is supposed to be one released for FR later this year. :)
 Where was this mentioned, kuje? You're refering to Rich Baker right? Get him back over here, we need to hear more about this 
It came out at last years gencon report on the gamingreport site and then Rich has also said it in the game designer thread over on the main FR boards. I guess I can dig up a quote later. :) |
| Lord Rad |
Posted - 01 Mar 2005 : 10:59:36
quote:
Originally posted by kuje31
BTW WOTC has decided to start making FR adventures and core adventures again. Rich said there is supposed to be one released for FR later this year. :)
Where was this mentioned, kuje? You're refering to Rich Baker right? Get him back over here, we need to hear more about this |
| Kuje |
Posted - 01 Mar 2005 : 02:10:57
quote:
Originally posted by Dahran
I have always looked at the current Forgotten Realms books has being middle of the road. They don''t give you has much information to think about has a lot of the older TSR products did, but even a large number of those weren't perfect by any means. I think the current products hit the mark nicely, though I hope the expand on some things that are covered in older source material, like Menzoberranzan and the Drow. I also think the current products look great has well. The art is nice and the quality of everything has a whole is wonderful, but has we all know we can't have our cake and eat it to. I think were lucky to even of gotten some things released, considering that Wizards of the Coast/Hasbro doesn't plan on releasing any adventures for Forgotten Realms anymore. Which has much has that fact bothers me to seemingly no end, they could take more away from Forgotten Realms than that. I hope they won't though and I pray that maybe they will license Forgotten Realms out to a smaller publisher who could produce adventure modules and source books that better meet the demands of the people who support Forgotten Realms. Just has Sovereign Press did with Dragonlance, a setting Wizards of the Coast was no longer producing. If they would crank out a few more adventures I'd be in Heaven.
BTW WOTC has decided to start making FR adventures and core adventures again. Rich said there is supposed to be one released for FR later this year. :) |
| Dahran |
Posted - 01 Mar 2005 : 02:05:31
I have always looked at the current Forgotten Realms books has being middle of the road. They don''t give you has much information to think about has a lot of the older TSR products did, but even a large number of those weren't perfect by any means. I think the current products hit the mark nicely, though I hope the expand on some things that are covered in older source material, like Menzoberranzan and the Drow. I also think the current products look great has well. The art is nice and the quality of everything has a whole is wonderful, but has we all know we can't have our cake and eat it to. I think were lucky to even of gotten some things released, considering that Wizards of the Coast/Hasbro doesn't plan on releasing any adventures for Forgotten Realms anymore. Which has much has that fact bothers me to seemingly no end, they could take more away from Forgotten Realms than that. I hope they won't though and I pray that maybe they will license Forgotten Realms out to a smaller publisher who could produce adventure modules and source books that better meet the demands of the people who support Forgotten Realms. Just has Sovereign Press did with Dragonlance, a setting Wizards of the Coast was no longer producing. If they would crank out a few more adventures I'd be in Heaven. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 27 Feb 2005 : 15:43:27
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Bah, I say. They should try actually giving us what we want before deciding it'll never sell.
Agreed.
It may be a strategy considered too risky by some, but then, a lot of the gaming industry is built on risk. Look at the settings that get published by third-parties that don't see any further expansion due to poor sales for the campaign book.
|
| Faraer |
Posted - 26 Feb 2005 : 00:49:08
As I've said before, Realmslore would probably be better served by a smaller publisher with smaller overheads who could publish more detailed books and make a comfortable profit if Wizards didn't charge overmuch for the licence. Rich actually said he was open to this when I suggested it.
(My copy of Lost Empires hasn't arrived yet.) |
| tauster |
Posted - 25 Feb 2005 : 09:15:25
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos
Have you guys ever seen the "alms for an ex-leper" bit from the film Monty Python's Life of Brian? Do you realise just how incongruent LEoF is in the FR 3E scheme of things and how thankful we should be that it actually saw the light of day in the format it did?
my ramblings were not aimed in LEoFīs direction - i donīt even have the book (yet). it was written with "constructive criticism" (donīt know if this phrase exists in english language...) in mind and aimed at the persons in charge (whoever that might be) in general. in regard to LEoF: i canīt wait to get it into my greedy fing... erm... my careful hands!
i am sorry if i was misunderstood; discussions without seeing your counterparts often leads to such misunderstandings, and not being a native english speaker doesnīt make things easier, either.
tauster |
| George Krashos |
Posted - 25 Feb 2005 : 05:14:09
Have you guys ever seen the "alms for an ex-leper" bit from the film Monty Python's Life of Brian? Do you realise just how incongruent LEoF is in the FR 3E scheme of things and how thankful we should be that it actually saw the light of day in the format it did?
Personally, I'm just saying a big "thanks" to WotC for letting it happen - hopefully the fans will get behind it and buy up big so they come around to the idea that lore-heavy products can impress the market.
-- George Krashos
|
| SirUrza |
Posted - 25 Feb 2005 : 00:56:06
It's typical WOTC. I'm sure there's more text they could include, there's just this stigma about spelling things out in the 3E RPG of the Realms. They don't want to blunder into contradicting themselves anymore I think. |
| tauster |
Posted - 24 Feb 2005 : 08:35:50
why donīt they just use a smaller fontsize?
i remember that i could hardly believe my eyes when i first read voloīs guide to waterdeep and found that oft-used excuse (something like "all informations about waterdeep would have takeen several books this size, yadda yadda...") - written in HUGED LETTERS!  ...and one page before that there was the usual smaller fontsize. 
i donīt mind when a lorebook (or any book, for that matter) has a somewhat smallish fontsize; when thatīs the prize for stuffing more information in! and i donīt think somebody who bought a FR lorebook would complain. sure, a fontsize of 6 would be overshot the mark, but fontsize 13 (like in VGtW, i guess) isnīt appropriate either.
the same goes for illustration and margin (the fontsize really is a minor issue in most 3e books, i think they found a very good balance there): as much as i love the new 3e book design, i would always prefer information over illustration. better leave out five pictures and stuff in one more paragraph! you can always put the left-out pictures in a web encancement (like itīs done today with left-out text).
the same holds for margins: i wonīt mind if theyīd be 1 cm smaller. in a book of more than 100 pages, that would mean a neat couple of additional space!
tauster |
| Dargoth |
Posted - 24 Feb 2005 : 05:47:17
The perhaps he'd like to explain why theyve cut 32 pages out of Champions of Ruin and Waterdeep?
Both of which are ONLY 160 pages |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 24 Feb 2005 : 05:39:23
Bah, I say. They should try actually giving us what we want before deciding it'll never sell. |
