Wizards of the Coast vs. TSR . . .

[VAN]

Lets say that the TSR put the basis but the others keep doing something
as well.

[Bloody Morgan]

For the line as a whole, I would say WotC, for exactly the same reasons as Igor. Under their ownership, the best supplements for Ravenloft - the Gazetteers - were released.

[DeepShadow of FoS]

the reprinting of the old novels with new cover art

In what way is this "taking away some of the "classic" elements of Ravenloft found in the genre when TSR owned it."? I'd think that reprinting the old novels would be a return to the classic.

the company's refusal to allow PN Elrod to write another Strahd novel

This is the first I've heard about this. Got a source?

[Undead Cabbage]

I voted for WotC. They licensed Ravenloft to Arthaus. If they hadn't done that, we wouldn't have had the last twenty or so supplements, including the Gazetteers.

TSR's management led it to bankrupt-cy. I remember at the time, everyone was dead certain there wouldn't ever be more Ravenloft.

For the line as a whole, I would say WotC, for exactly the same reasons as Igor. Under their ownership, the best supplements for Ravenloft - the Gazetteers - were released.

Eerrr, I'm not so certain something that WOTC can be creditted for something that Arthaus and WW did. If WotC was looking to make something out of RL, they would have done it themselves. I get the sense that they were looking to get money for something they didn't want anything to do with.

I also think there's two different questions in the air here: who did the most for Ravenloft litterally, and who did the most for Ravenloft economically.

[HuManBing]

Don't forget WotC was also the one who was responsible for the contract breakdown with White Wolf, leading to WW cancelling their work for RL.

So from a certain viewpoint you could hold them responsible for destroying that work relationship as well as for creating it.

Add to that the RPGA network's refusal to do a Living Ravenloft campaign because it would require players to buy a rival company's books... and you have a perfect example of a damn good role playing setting getting shafted over by multiple companies because of simple bureaucracy and economic greed. :/

[LadySoth]

the reprinting of the old novels with new cover art

In what way is this "taking away some of the "classic" elements of Ravenloft found in the genre when TSR owned it."? I'd think that reprinting the old novels would be a return to the classic.

the company's refusal to allow PN Elrod to write another Strahd novel

This is the first I've heard about this. Got a source?

Sure. According to PN Elrod's website, she is unable to write other books in the series because of "artistic differences" with WoTC. Seems like there's a little bit of bad blood on both sides. I've already posted this quote on another thread, so apologies if you've already read it, but here it is again:

Will you write any more I, Strahd books?

No. Wizards of the Coast owned that character and they’re cutting their Ravenloft line. It will likely always be the 2 novels and the short story in the Tales of Ravenloft anthology. We had some artistic differences, enough so I know I am not fond of work-for-hire writing. (That’s any book written in someone else’s universe, like Star Wars or Star Trek. You have no control over it and the publisher can mangle your story all they like. Ouch!) It’s too bad, cause I REALLY loved the Strahd character; it was such fun to play a bad guy. But I expect bits of him will be back as characters in other novels using a different name.

Perhaps if both WoTC and Elrod were to compromise, there could be more books in the series, but that doesn't look like it will happen anytime soon. My feeling is that TSR gave her more leeway when writing, that WoTC did. Such a shame.

[Igor the Henchman]

Don't forget WotC was also the one who was responsible for the contract breakdown with White Wolf, leading to WW cancelling their work for RL.

So from a certain viewpoint you could hold them responsible for destroying that work relationship as well as for creating it.

Add to that the RPGA network's refusal to do a Living Ravenloft campaign because it would require players to buy a rival company's books... and you have a perfect example of a damn good role playing setting getting shafted over by multiple companies because of simple bureaucracy and economic greed. :/

The insider accounts of these episodes tend to be rather blurry. Having no knowledge of who did what first in whose office, I try to avoid discussing them. I concede that you may be right, however - its a shame the license wasn't renewed.

Eerrr, I'm not so certain something that WOTC can be creditted for something that Arthaus and WW did. If WotC was looking to make something out of RL, they would have done it themselves. I get the sense that they were looking to get money for something they didn't want anything to do with.

I wasn't implying WotC should be credited for the success of the Arthaus line. Arthaus did all the decisions, WotC merely provided a license. I find, however, that even this small gesture proved very considerable for the well-being of the setting. Since the bigger company had no plans whatsoever for Ravenloft at the time, instead of sitting on it, it chose to lend it to a company who would be willing to give it a whirl. To me, that's showing some concern for the well-being of the setting, and a desire to experiment with market possibilities. The result was that Ravenloft escaped from the pit that gobbled Birthright, Dark Sun, Mystara and many other classic settings. The credit, I find, is to be laid at the feet of both WotC and Arthaus. One showed sensible management, the other provided the needed creative spirit.

Add to that my opinion that Expedition to Castle Ravenloft might prove very good for the setting in the long run, and you get why I chose to vote for WotC.

[Rotipher of the FoS]

I voted for TSR, as I felt their contribution in starting the game-setting was far greater than WotC's, in leasing the right to perpetuate it to another company.

I would, however, like to mention one other thing WotC's done and, in fact, is still doing: it doesn't hamper the online fan-base's efforts to keep Ravenloft alive on the Web, despite its own decision to drop the product line. Were it a different sort of company -- too paranoid about hoarding its copyrights to allow we gamers our freedom to speculate and create, or too dead-set on addicting us to Eberron to allow the name "Ravenloft" to be spoken without an avalanche of lawsuits -- WotC could potentially have shut down websites like this one, long ago.

[LadySoth]

I would, however, like to mention one other thing WotC's done and, in fact, is still doing: it doesn't hamper the online fan-base's efforts to keep Ravenloft alive on the Web, despite its own decision to drop the product line.

Do you have a source on this? Several people have mentioned that WoTC is dropping the product line, yet in the latest novel re-releases, there are mentions of releases extending into mid and late 2007. If they really are dropping the line, why all the projected estimates of future releases?

[Rotipher of the FoS]

I mean their choice to drop the game-product line, which was made years ago. Whether or not they pick it up again is an issue for the future, and the poll addressed their past handling of Ravenloft. Plus, I'm not convinced that re-releasing novels from over a decade ago counts as "supporting" the setting, for all that it's nice to know they haven't totally forgotten about it.

[Undead Cabbage]

I voted for TSR, as I felt their contribution in starting the game-setting was far greater than WotC's, in leasing the right to perpetuate it to another company.

I would, however, like to mention one other thing WotC's done and, in fact, is still doing: it doesn't hamper the online fan-base's efforts to keep Ravenloft alive on the Web, despite its own decision to drop the product line. Were it a different sort of company -- too paranoid about hoarding its copyrights to allow we gamers our freedom to speculate and create, or too dead-set on addicting us to Eberron to allow the name "Ravenloft" to be spoken without an avalanche of lawsuits -- WotC could potentially have shut down websites like this one, long ago.

This is a good point. There's a lot worse out there (for settings and novels), for instance:"Could the contestants of the Anne McAffery Fan Fiction contest please report to the back room with the men holding night sticks"

Then again, this site is technically not the first to be googled when someone researches "Ravenloft". Think maybe their position would change if our position were to change?

[Bluebomber4evr]

I voted for TSR, as I felt their contribution in starting the game-setting was far greater than WotC's, in leasing the right to perpetuate it to another company.

I would, however, like to mention one other thing WotC's done and, in fact, is still doing: it doesn't hamper the online fan-base's efforts to keep Ravenloft alive on the Web, despite its own decision to drop the product line. Were it a different sort of company -- too paranoid about hoarding its copyrights to allow we gamers our freedom to speculate and create, or too dead-set on addicting us to Eberron to allow the name "Ravenloft" to be spoken without an avalanche of lawsuits -- WotC could potentially have shut down websites like this one, long ago.

Yeah, TSR was infamous for that. Lorraine Williams' name was cursed far and wide across the internet and TSR was often written as "T$R" for their rampant copyright paranoia. WotC is much friendlier with its fan-base in that regard.

As for the product line as a whole, I'd say TSR, though. They produced a lot of books and created the setting. They gave the setting a lot of support for 10 years (1990-2000). Most other 2nd edition settings didn't even last half as long. After the hack job WotC did to I6 in EtCR, well, I really don't have faith in them to do the setting justice.

As for White Wolf, I absolutely love their Gazetteers, but as great as they are, they suffer the same problem that all the WW-produced books have: horrible, horrible editing. TSR wasn't perfect at this either, but I've never seen the kind of glaring errors like S' description of the Gates of Barovia and the Svalich Pass in Gaz I in a TSR Ravenloft book. WW also gave us one of the worst, most inconsistent Ravenloft books ever: Champions of Darkness. I don't need to say too much more about that. (not to say TSR didn't give us a few stinkers, they did, but nothing so blatantly out of key with the setting as CoD)

[DeepShadow of FoS]

Perhaps if both WoTC and Elrod were to compromise, there could be more books in the series, but that doesn't look like it will happen anytime soon. My feeling is that TSR gave her more leeway when writing, that WoTC did. Such a shame.

...Okay, but there's nothing to support such a "feeling" in the excerpt you posted, nor does it justify saying they "refused" to let her write an I Strahd novel.

Someone who hates Elrod could just as easily (and just as erroneously) lump that quote together with Elrod's hidden messages and conclude that she's being an adolescent, petulant jerk.

The bottom line is that we don't know all of what happened between them, nor do we know all of what happened under the direction of WotC and TSR. We can speculate, but that's all it will ever be. This entire thread is nothing but an exercise in confirmation bias with limited information.

So many of the things that are cited as proof of one side on this thread could be flipped the other way. Couldn't it have been shrewd allocation of resources that led WotC to sublet RL to Arthaus? What about keeping RL alive online for free? Why don't they get credit for that? And how is it that people can't let go of Champions of Darkness, and yet they conveniently forget...

...Feast of Goblyns, which kicked off the line with a veritable funhouse built of giant bones.
...The rest of the grand conjunction series, which established RL as Castlevania gaming, sans all the gothic parts.
...Adam's Wrath, which contradicted the canon timeline in six places and set a gaming record for railroading.
...The entire Grim Harvest series, which broke the record set by Adam's Wrath, had people called to church in Darkon by the screams of the damned, had a little Vistani boy read the tarokka for the PC's, and inexplicably rewrote Falkovnia as a bastion of magical power.
...The Requiem, which introduced the worst rules I've personally ever seen for playing undead PC's, tied to an adventure that hinged at one point on the PC's casting sleep, charm and/or hold on an undead.

I'm not arguing anti-TSR or pro-WotC; I'm arguing for people to be more reasonable. Why does William W. Connors get all the credit for good stuff, and yet people conveniently forget that he penned the contradictory train wreck that was the Shadowborne material and was the source of the the "Bill Rule" that was responsible for most of the railroading in early work?

Let's get real here. We don't know the majority of what's happened at the management level, and it's doubtful we ever will. WotC has control of the line we love now. Let's do what we can to honor that stewardship on our end.

[Ivana_Boritsi]

WW also gave us one of the worst, most inconsistent Ravenloft books ever: Champions of Darkness. I don't need to say too much more about that. (not to say TSR didn't give us a few stinkers, they did, but nothing so blatantly out of key with the setting as CoD)

How soon some forget...

Remember that TSR gave us Thoughts of Darkness, one of the most infamous modules ever published. When people ask about Top Ten Worst D&D Adventures, that module consistently makes the list. Just about every time. That's pretty bad, folks.

[vipera aspis]

i voted wizards. Heros of horror may not exacty be Ravenloft, but it is damn close. and famous ravenloft characters are making covers of Dragon now! I dont care what you say Soth is very Ravenloft.

though between companies, i do prefere the art from 2nd ed ravenloft material.