Petition

[DKEvermore@aol.co]

In a message dated 7/18/98 7:59:37 AM, you wrote:

>Tell me, DKEvermore - (and this is in no way meant in a derogatory fshion)
>
>What is the BEST way to preserve Cerilia? The longer it takes TSR to put
>
>something on the shelves, the more our campaigns grow apart. I admit - I
>

If we keep playing it, a provide feedback, it MIGHT give them a reason to keep
it going. But in the end, it's up to TSR. This list has been active and
busy for a long time now. We've kept up the commentary and communication with
the designers (and they've made a hearty attempt to keep up with us!). Most
of the players and GMs I know have bought a copy of everything that's come out
for it. Some of them even still have the stuff in the original store
wrappers-never opened because that was "GM stuff" but wanting to support the
line.

As I see it, we've done our part. If TSR feels like devoting time and energy
in bringing it back, it will. I feel like I've done almost everything I can
for the game. (I'm not even playing with the AD&D system anymore, but I'm
still using the setting.)

I'm willing to do more, but I feel like it's out of my hands at this point
anyway.

- -DKEvermore

[Gary V. Foss]

DKEvermore@aol.com wrote:

> In a message dated 7/18/98 7:59:37 AM, you wrote:
>
> >Tell me, DKEvermore - (and this is in no way meant in a derogatory fshion)
> >What is the BEST way to preserve Cerilia? The longer it takes TSR to put
> >something on the shelves, the more our campaigns grow apart. I admit - I
> >
>
> If we keep playing it, a provide feedback, it MIGHT give them a reason to keep
> it going. But in the end, it's up to TSR. This list has been active and
> busy for a long time now. We've kept up the commentary and communication with
> the designers (and they've made a hearty attempt to keep up with us!). Most
> of the players and GMs I know have bought a copy of everything that's come out
> for it. Some of them even still have the stuff in the original store
> wrappers-never opened because that was "GM stuff" but wanting to support the
> line.
>
> As I see it, we've done our part. If TSR feels like devoting time and energy
> in bringing it back, it will. I feel like I've done almost everything I can
> for the game. (I'm not even playing with the AD&D system anymore, but I'm
> still using the setting.)
>
> I'm willing to do more, but I feel like it's out of my hands at this point
> anyway.

You know, this might seem like a bit of an oddball comment, but the big problem
with Birthright to me has been marketing. That's what it's all about. The system
and campaign are solid, TSR just didn't do a very good job conveying to their
customers the setting, so it fumbled.

On that note, I think part of the problem might be something as innocuous seeming
as the title. I mean, Birthright sounds a little vague, you know? Most of the
successful campaign settings have been named after the land itself or some
particularly notable locale within it. Ravenloft, the Forgotten Realms, Oerth,
etc. Birthright sounds more like a system (which it is, I guess) rather than a
setting, so I think it lost a lot of people. I mean, people already learned how
to play AD&D right? The presentation of BR made it seem like they would have to
learn an entirely new system, which probably put off most of the folks who read
the box.

I think TSR would be much better off calling the much anticipated (by people
around here) relaunch of the setting The Lands of Cerilia or something like that,
as it would seem less intimidating to newbies. I think they should come up with
something catchier than TLoC, but this is coming out rather extemporaneously....

At least, that's my half-assed marketing take on it.

Oh, the low-level aspect of the campaign setting is probably not the sexiest thing
about the campaign either. It attracted me, but I'm a freakish aberration in the
gaming world (and many other places) being over thirty and all. Higher level
campaigns seem to be more appealing to the average gamer, as they have more
flash/bang stuff in them.

Gary

[Gary V. Foss]

Gary V. Foss wrote:

> Oh, the low-level aspect of the campaign setting is probably not the sexiest thing
> about the campaign either. It attracted me, but I'm a freakish aberration in the
> gaming world (and many other places) being over thirty and all. Higher level
> campaigns seem to be more appealing to the average gamer, as they have more
> flash/bang stuff in them.

You know, I'm going to respond to myself on this post.... I don't really think I said
everything I wanted to, and as I reread it I get a creepy feeling off it, so I'm going
to make a clarification or two.

I don't really see BR as a low-level campaign world. I know, that's how it got
promoted and all, but I don't honestly think it is. There are gobs of high level NPCs
presented in the standard material. NPCs of higher level than I have ever had a PC
legitimately rise to in a campaign that I am running. Oh, I know there are more
powerful folks portrayed in other settings, but I honestly think a lot of the BR NPCs
could hold their own in just about any gaming world.

I think the low-level promotion of the campaign world came about as a response to
people seeing characters below the "name level" of their character classes running
around as the rulers of their respective realms and leading vast armies. The early
testers and designers of the game couldn't help but see that as a "low-level"
emphasis. In fact, they might very well have intended to keep things that way, but as
the setting developed and NPCs like Aelies came along, it became less and less
feasible. Of course, the most powerful NPCs in BR are the villains, but I think
that's a good thing. It gives the PCs something a difficult task and the DM a
constant threat. That's something that every campaign world needs.

Essentially, I see Cerilia as being a more rationally designed campaign setting.
Sure, there are high level NPCs, but they are relatively few and far between. They
correspond to the size of the population. Temples aren't cluttered with high priests,
every inn is not rife with barbarian lords and the countryside isn't littered with
wizard's towers. To me, that's a logically designed setting, not a "low-level"
campaign. I've seen a lot of worlds where some farmer is a 3rd or 5th level fighter.
While a few of these guys might exist, that appears to be the norm in a lot of
campaign settings. That just doesn't make sense to me.

Anyway, I hope I haven't bored you too much with this clarification/diatribe.

Laters,
Gary