JinnTolser wrote:
Sounds like some flawed logic to me. If those campaign settings had never existed in the first place, then perhaps D&D players wouldn't have been fractured into these so-called fractious groups that hate each other. However, by refusing to update the majority of these settings, what they're doing isn't really bringing players together. It may look like that, but what they're really doing is cutting off fans who loved the settings that didn't make it to 3e. If the D&D community appears more unified now, it's mostly because the other "fractious groups" are being ignored.
Nah, it makes sense. In coming into the third edition, WotC made the decision to focus on the generic tools for the d20 system. Instead of breaking themselves across ten or twelve different campaign worlds that only got a silver of attention each they would produce what you needed to do it yourself. Greyhawk was kept as the default setting and Forgotten Realms because it's popularity was through the roof (especially compared to all the other settings). Later on they realized that they needed to introduce a new setting to mark the new edition and lo, Eberron was created.
You also have to remember that other settings generally weren't that huge. You won't find anything that resembles Athas.org or the Fraternity dealing with Kara-Tur, Maztica, Mystra, or Spelljammer. The amount of time and money it costs to produce a product (mixed with a fairly low turnout if it is setting specific for a weaker line) just doesn't keep a company running in the end. TSR proved that.
Now WotC works to create "keystone" products (those that give new insights or approaches to certain topics like cold weather, dwarves, or magic weapons) and two extremely profitable settings. The setting you love existed in 2e, and has all the information you need to use it. If you're looking for mechanics or a new take on the setting, look at all of the third party publishers out there. You'll find what you want.
It isn't that they're ignoring the groups that liked a setting, it's that they can't justify the cost to their shareholders (don't start complaining about capitalism! If you do, start pointing the finger at WW for dropping Ravenloft). No company can do that, especially when there are alternative ways to approach the problem. WotC gives you the tools to recreate the campagin world yourself because they don't have the time or money to support all their old settings in the way people want.
You may disagree with me, but here's a little test. Try to map out a 12 month publishing schedule which releases two books every month, and provide an even amount of material to all of their settings (new and old) while still producing new general material. Remember, if you add more books to the schedule quality drops across the board due to lack of manpower and funds. Not supporting a setting means ignoring a group of players, so you can't allow that either.
If you can work out a schedule like that I'm sure WotC will pick you up to head their finances in moment.
Also remember that WotC isn't being an ogre and hoarding the settings for themselves. They're willing to sell rights to companies that want them. If a particular setting is really that popular a company can purchase the rights, or will have already created something fairly similar to fill it's niche.
The Remnants have one saying to represent loss, disappearance, exile, and death. It is [i]Shiao Marests[/i], "Taken by The Shadows".
