quote:

---

Originally posted by Razz

What I mean by my title is simply will we ever see lore and material (whether from Greenwood or game books), on places hardly covered or not covered before?

At this point, I am just so bored of reading about the same places and the same gods. The Heartlands, Waterdeep, Baldur's Gate, Silverymoon, the Sword Coast, the North...over and over and over again.

Lathander, Helm, Torm, Tyr, Ilmater, Bane, Bhaal, Cyric, Lolth, and gods be damned, MYSTRA MYSTRA MYSTRA.

I am personally tired of it. Are we doomed to cycle through these lands and deities forever?

I want more info on the giant gods, the dragon gods, others in the Faerunian pantheon and other pantheons, the sea gods, and so on. I think I am going to tear my hair out if I see another Mystra or Shar plot again.

There's Sossal, and Chult, Lantan, and High Ice, and Murghom, and also updates to places we haven't received updates on in a very long time.

This frustration reached its peak for me when one of my players had cool ideas for his Rogue with Hoar as his patron and he sighs sadly and goes,"I really like this deity, I don't understand why Hoar doesn't get more spotlight. I wish I had a lot more lore on this deity and his church beyond Powers&Pantheons. So tired of hearing about the other same ol' gods."

Which then gave me the inspiration to rant here about it.

Does anyone else feel a bit frustrated at this as well?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Old Man Harpell

I would argue that the motivating force is neither 'politics' or 'respect for cultures'.

It's economics.

Will a published treatment of Maztica (or the non-Eurocentric setting of your choice) makes oodles of money? If they believe the answer will be Yes, they'll publish it. If not, they won't. It's as simple as that.

M.A.R. Barker's name is famous for Tekumel, one of the reasons being it wasn't 'standard' fantasy fare. Anyone who ever played Skyrealms of Jorune, the few SF elements aside, will see what was essentially a fantasy game with a non-standard culture in the backdrop (though admittedly due to the influence of various alien civilizations). These are just a couple of examples. But they weren't predicated on forced respect, or a political agenda - they were interesting because the authors set out to make a really good backdrop against which roleplaying stories could be told, and in that vein, they succeeded.

Realms-wise, they need to go back to those places that were still around in 1375 DR, but had been wrecked by the time 1485 DR came out. Lantan, Hlondeth, Luiren, Nimbral, Dambrath, Skullport, Halruaa...essentially, they need to un-dork what they did to these places, and make them viable locations in the Realms again.

- OMH

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Irennan

The Realms are not the default setting anymore, though.
"Does the D&D tabletop RPG have one official setting? The answer is yes. That setting is the multiverse, which includes all D&D worlds. The worlds occupy pockets of the Material Plane—sort of like planets but in a space shaped by magic and divine forces."
Read more: http://www.enworld.org/forum/content.php?2272-Warforged-Coming-to-D-D-Soon!#.VMJZ7_6G8go#ixzz3PefVtbUM

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by moonbeast


I totally agree with the OP post. I'd love to see them publish (soon I hope) campaign books for:

Kara-Tur, Calimshan, Cormyr (which could also include info for Sembia, Cormyr's nemesis), and maybe even the Moonshaes.

Heck, maybe even an entire book for an updated look (and to update us on the history) of Evermeet, Island of the Elves. How has Evermeet changed in the last 100 years. What happened or changed since the end of the 2nd Sundering. Who is the current reigning Elven monarch? And are the elves any "stronger" and do they have any irredentist plans to re-expand back into Faerun? And did the Evil Gnome Legion from Tinkerhell really blow up the Grand Spires of Leuthilspar?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Diffan

I'd love to see more on the inner workings and lands of Rasheman, Impiltur, Vilhon Reach, etc. I'm also a big can of th3 Moonsea and those environments.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Misereor


I would like a closer look at Geopolitics in the realms.
Local sourcebooks usually have a few lines about areas of contention between neighbours, but it is rarely fleshed out.

I would like to see a sourcebook about everything from religious disputes, trade routes, and rare resources to weather patterns and Orc overpopulation, and how it all adds up to regional dynamics and tensions, and how to weave this into your campaign. "Living Campaign" indeed.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TBeholder

Well, you know.
That said, if it was completely up to the drones without even corporate politics on the way, it would be more of "Drizzt, Drizzt, Drizzt..."

quote:

---

Originally posted by Irennan

The Realms are not the default setting anymore, though.
"Does the D&D tabletop RPG have one official setting? The answer is yes. That setting is the multiverse, which includes all D&D worlds. The worlds occupy pockets of the Material Plane—sort of like planets but in a space shaped by magic and divine forces."
Read more: http://www.enworld.org/forum/content.php?2272-Warforged-Coming-to-D-D-Soon!#.VMJZ7_6G8go#ixzz3PefVtbUM

---

Does this mean no more using FR as a trash bin and RSE every week, or that they lost capability to maintain continuity even on the level of FR 4e?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by cpthero2

As many have eluded to in the past, there were reported beliefs from marketing analysis conducted, that in order to prepare for development of the next market segment of customers into the future, they had to appeal to them. As many came to believe, 4th edition had a powerful sense of a tabletop RPG with a strong angle towards appealing to MMORPG'ers, as much as possible (I'm not saying that is good or bad, just neutrally commenting, and again just making assumptions here: no first hand knowledge). One of the chief complaints, supposedly, from that market cohort of 13 to 20 year olds from interviews and focus groups, was that they felt the Realms material had too high of a buy-in to assimilate due to the vast knowledge base of the existing Realms. In effect, that market segment, demographically and psychographically, did not want to feel like "noobs." Not a judgment again, rather, just an assumption that the marketing department was analyzing and trying to make what they believed were informed decisions in how to place their products in front of that up and coming generation of potential new customers.

If that assumption is correct based on market research they may have conducted, it would stand to reason that any additional development of 'fluff' material would only stand to increase the divide between current and potential, new future users. Since WotC wants to know that they are going to sell those printed assets, they want to make sure they are accurate in advance. The issue though is that us Realms lovers, didn't respond well to that production response for 4th (as evidenced by their sales records) and they had to go into emergency mode.

My interpretation of things now is, they are still slow walking things. They are producing the same material in 5th, that is effectively on par with what was printed in 3/3.5 (though they are even still deficit when compared to things such as 'The Lost Empires of Faerun', etc.). I honestly feel that WotC is reticent to print materials that are comprehensive, and even more engrossing, when they likely have other product lines that they have in the pipeline for future production. Anything that they see as a potential barrier to enter is going to make them leery to produce those items.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Corruption

With my D&D group, we sometimes make up own places and Gods. Some are pretty out there, like Dundee as a demi-god, Ramsey the Foul-mouthed demi-God of Hospitality and restranters, Jack; trickster demi-god of a barbarian tribe that lives in icey areas.
Make up your own campaigns and experiment.
Maybe even visit another world in the FR one is too crowded. Make one up! Go nuts and have fun.

However, I have to admit, things are pretty stale with WotC. I mean with all the chaos going on, why not change things around. Mystria dies, as did 2 demi-gods of magic? Why didn't the Lord of Lyches step in as a demi-God of magic and try to get control of magic? Why didn't any other go called Gods of magic step in? Even a forign Diety of magic would have been welcome, so why didn't one take advantage of things?
Why not a larger turn over during the chaos.

I think I know, and it is only partly due to marketing. You are meant in most cases to just settle things down when you play. By things being stable, you can play almost any module in any order you want. If things change a fair bit, that won't happen

When you come to other areas, things can change a lot, but the writters seem to be in a rut. I'd love to see an adventure based in their version of Africa, or Australia. Maybe even Antartica.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Starshade

quote:

---

Originally posted by cpthero2

As many have eluded to in the past, there were reported beliefs from marketing analysis conducted, that in order to prepare for development of the next market segment of customers into the future, they had to appeal to them. As many came to believe, 4th edition had a powerful sense of a tabletop RPG with a strong angle towards appealing to MMORPG'ers, as much as possible (I'm not saying that is good or bad, just neutrally commenting, and again just making assumptions here: no first hand knowledge). One of the chief complaints, supposedly, from that market cohort of 13 to 20 year olds from interviews and focus groups, was that they felt the Realms material had too high of a buy-in to assimilate due to the vast knowledge base of the existing Realms. In effect, that market segment, demographically and psychographically, did not want to feel like "noobs." Not a judgment again, rather, just an assumption that the marketing department was analyzing and trying to make what they believed were informed decisions in how to place their products in front of that up and coming generation of potential new customers.

If that assumption is correct based on market research they may have conducted, it would stand to reason that any additional development of 'fluff' material would only stand to increase the divide between current and potential, new future users. Since WotC wants to know that they are going to sell those printed assets, they want to make sure they are accurate in advance. The issue though is that us Realms lovers, didn't respond well to that production response for 4th (as evidenced by their sales records) and they had to go into emergency mode.

My interpretation of things now is, they are still slow walking things. They are producing the same material in 5th, that is effectively on par with what was printed in 3/3.5 (though they are even still deficit when compared to things such as 'The Lost Empires of Faerun', etc.). I honestly feel that WotC is reticent to print materials that are comprehensive, and even more engrossing, when they likely have other product lines that they have in the pipeline for future production. Anything that they see as a potential barrier to enter is going to make them leery to produce those items.

---

I think I agree, about to your analysis.My thought: All alterations of that degree will alienate some players, take Games Workshop's move from Wharhammer Fantasy to Age of Sigmar; some quit, and is quite vocal about it. But more starter playing.
Wotc's move from 3.5 to 4e meant Pathfinder could easily have become the leading marked brand, and Wotc's entire D&D dep. turning to an obsolete Dinosaur, so obviously something was wrong. My thought, borrowing from computer game design theory: 4e was simply not enough "Fun" for the gamers of mmorpg's.

Equally interesting is the rumors of 2e's boxed sets, which supposedly were sold with negative Contribution margin...

My take: any coming diversity and Kara-Tur content, need to be 'Fun', and have positive Contribution margin.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by cpthero2


As to your point regarding Paizo, I completely agree with you there. I feel that Paizo really messed up when they didn't move in for the kill. This is a classic example of a marketing department so focused on mid-stream analysis that they didn't stop to consider reassessing the landscape and where it's competitors were with their sales. A simple and small assessment at even the store level to evaluate product interest from consumers would have shows that 4e was a disaster as a product line, and that they could have pivoted to wreck WotC on that line......as I sit here quarterbacking the day after from my chair, haha.

---

• West [consisting of Pacific and Mountain districts, as well as Alaska and Hawaii]
• Mid-West [consisting of West and East North Central
• Northeast [consisting of Middle Atlantic and New England
• South [consisting of West and East South Central and South Atlantic]

quote:

---

I don’t think WotC was ever in any danger from Paizo.

---

quote:

---

...but there was enough of the former that WotC

---

quote:

---

I found it easier to tell people I played D&D, instead of saying I played Pathfinder.

---

quote:

---

Hasbro

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wooly Rupert

quote:

---

Originally posted by cpthero2


As to your point regarding Paizo, I completely agree with you there. I feel that Paizo really messed up when they didn't move in for the kill. This is a classic example of a marketing department so focused on mid-stream analysis that they didn't stop to consider reassessing the landscape and where it's competitors were with their sales. A simple and small assessment at even the store level to evaluate product interest from consumers would have shows that 4e was a disaster as a product line, and that they could have pivoted to wreck WotC on that line......as I sit here quarterbacking the day after from my chair, haha.

---

I don’t think WotC was ever in any danger from Paizo.

Paizo was on top for a while, and they certainly did cut into WotC’s market share.

But WotC had three things going for it, and two of them, in particular, meant that any attempt to put them under would fail.

1) Those who like 4E were very, very in favor of 4E. Watching the "Edition Wars" as they happened, there were basically two reactions to 4E: "Kill it! Kill it with fire!" and "I want to have 4E’s baby!" People either absolutely loved it or they absolutely hated it – but there was enough of the former that WotC, though I’m sure they were very concerned about how things unfolded, knew they had a solid base they could build on.

2) Name recognition. Pathfinder had a very successful launch, and it’s been a successful enough game to have a spin-off, a 2nd edition, a robust product line, novels, comics, and at least one computer game. Despite all that, they were the new kids on the block, comparatively speaking, and their game was built on the one that had been around for decades and had all the name recognition: Dungeons & Dragons. I’m a huge fan of Paizo and their stuff, and I couldn’t stand the 4E ruleset of D&D – but even I found it easier to tell people I played D&D, instead of saying I played Pathfinder.

3) Hasbro. Even when Pathfinder was outselling 4E, Paizo still didn’t have the funding and corporate support that Hasbro could potentially give WotC. Sure, Hasbro is never going to throw all of their weight behind WotC – but even a fraction of their weight would just roll right over Paizo, if that was Hasbro’s intention. Hasbro could have likely bought and shut down Paizo, if they wanted, without it being a blip on their bottom line.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by cpthero2

I will be making some assumptions. I am going to lay those out, so that the discussion can be more fruitful if you decide to critique my assumptions, they'll be easily listed (I always dislike it when argumentative opponents [academically argumentative, not hateful] don't list their assumptions easily).
[...]
you may take note that from approximately Q2 start 2011 through Q2 end 2014, Pathfinder had #1 marketshare. By measures in most industries that involve production with significant variable unit cost contribution to total cost, and a contribution margin that is likely high due to intensive capital inputs, the cost volume analysis is vital. With that in mind, knowing that volatility was low (you can tell by the sales for those three years in dominating WotC), their operative leverage was great. Essentially, by subtracting sales figures from variable inputs, the product line manager would have been able to demonstrate to the marketing VP, with a well articulated point, that they could add in more product lines with less risk. Now, the real question is, why did they not do so? I would gather it boils down to a simple factor: fear. Managers hate to stick their neck out, especially in high cost-volume industries where a bad line can make them look like fools. Upper management loves to Monday night quarterback back mid-management sales forecasts, even when supported by solid economic forecasts and finance figures, so that creates a risky shift response and you get......not much. hahaha So, I think while acknowledging my lack of industry specific work experience, that they could have taken a reasonably solid chance to dominate WotC. They were likely running scared though, and quite likely had unsophisticated managers (read as inexperienced in risk management,

---