General RPG DiscussionDiscussion of all RPGs and non-system-specific topics. DM/GM/player issues, settings, etc. Rules discussion belongs in one the forums below.
I know it's been some time since the NY Comicon, but while I was there I had the pleasure of speaking with Chris Perkins. One of my questions referred to campaign settings for 4e. He mentioned the next setting would be announced at GenCon (I think that was the convention he said, anyway...), but my follow up was something along the lines of:
There is a lot of pressure from long-time fans to revisit all the old campaign setting favorites like Dark Sun, Dragonlance, etc. But what about the new players, or the players looking for something new? Are there any plans to create a new campaign setting specifically introduced for 4e?
He replied something to the effects of: We have indeed been discussing the possibility of a completely original campaign setting.
It was also mentioned Birthright, Red Steel and Maztica probably would not ever see 4e revisits. However, there was talk on incorporating Birthright elements into future supplemental material, specifically keeps, bloodlines, etc.
Now I know his one line response might not be much, but I have a hunch we will see R&D working extra hard one of these coming years to produce an old setting AND a new labor of love. I don't think they would anger the masses with something new before Dragonlance and Dark Sun. So in that case, perhaps a 2012 original campaign setting? Then again, pretty damn late in the 4e hour... So my guess is a simultaneous releasing, if they decide to make an original one at all. From the feel I got from the overall presentation on D&D 2009, it seemed they are itching to create.
My money s on Dark Sun after Eberron to coincide with psionics PHB3 (don't know if it'll be in PHB3, but considering it was almost added to the initial SRD, there was mention of it almost getting into PHB2 but too many arcane and divine new classes, and psionic fans will mount a revolt if they have to wait any longer - I'd say it's a safe bet). After that I'd say a new setting would be almost certain after 3 revisits in a row. Dragonlance or Ravenloft would most likely follow in year 5 - although I could see Ravenloft being "backdoored" in earlier through being a sample setting in a horror book.
I could be wrong and they might release psionics without any related setting, but Dark Sun and psionics are so closely tied (with elementalism and Dark Sun not far behind), it wouldn't make a lot of sense to not tie them together. Plus, even early on when I wasn't a fan of 4e at all, it was clear that Dark Sun and 4e are a perfect match. Points of light, intensity of combat and "over the topness" of PC's abilities, plus Dark Sun was the only setting to incorporate Epic and the precursor to epic destinies right into the setting (Dragon Kings book).
I'm souped to find out what the new campaign setting is going to be. I'd be fine with Dragonlance or Darksun, which are the two obvious contenders for the spot, but I'd much rather see something original, and something that defies the norm a bit. Eberron was fantastic, and I'd love to see them reach out and perhaps even touch on new subgenres.
I think making Birthright a ruleset to deal with ruling a realm and having bloodlines is perfect, because the setting itself isn't that interesting. Sure there are gems to be found in the details, but it is just a pseudo-earth culture like Greyhawk or the Forgotten Realms.
Speaking Greyhawk, I think it already has been adapted for 4e in the best way it can be adapted. We've pillaged its storylines, monsters, demon lords, and classic dungeons ruthlessly for the "undefined" 4e setting. It is extremely easy to convert and play the old Greyhawk modules in 4e if you are not married to the minutae of the setting and 4e. You still see some complaints some minor changes (like Graz'zt's backstory), but because it isn't "Greyhawk Canon" it largely is accepted by the fan community without venom. I can't imagine the notoriously fussy Greyhawk fanbase not screaming sacriledge if 4e assumptions were imposed on the setting and room made in the Greyhawk for things like Dragonborn or Shifters.
The Dragonlance fans would probably take it better given that we went through the hard revision (and not for the better) with the 5th Age storyline a decade ago, along with a new continent of Taladas with different setting assumptions about the world a decade before that.
The suspicion among the fans though is that rather than releasing new campaign materials, WotC will just release the classic Chronicles modules over again. We all recognize it as a smart business move (because it sells better than the campaign materials for the setting) but we who choose it as our favourite setting have played through those adventures already. Though I'm a fan of the setting myself, like Birthright its gems are found in the minutae. Aside from some rather popular/unpopular racial choices (kender, gully dwarves, and gnomes) there isn't anything that really distinguishes it in flavour-wise from the "undefined" setting.
Ravenloft, Spelljammer and Planescape have also already been adapted for 4e with Manual of the Planes. Like Greyhawk, they had the canon and some of the problematic setting assumptions removed, and folded it into the "undefined" campaign setting. Also like Greyhawk, it has largely been adapted and adopted without huge protests from fans because it borrows instead of replacing the setting's canon. I imagine more borrowing of these two settings will occur if they ever release sourcebooks for specific planes, though planar-specific sourcebooks might be more of a niche market than WotC is willing to bet on.
Dark Sun has definate possibility of being adapted because it has a distinctive flavour (gritty, post-apocolyptic) and because it the only setting that has psionics as a core part of its campaign flavour. So thus, of all the settings it is the best positioned to showcase both an alternate playing style and an alternate magic system.
However, Dark Sun fans are at least as touchy as Greyhawk fans, given the massive negative reaction to the 3e adaptation in Dungeon Magazine. That was about as faithful to the source material and backstory of the setting as one could get, and it is pretty much hated for mentioning that a player who likes paladins can play a paladin in the setting. Given that WotC probably wants players to use its sourcebooks (PHB1, PHB2 etc) in the Dark Sun world, a certain amount of reinterpretation is probably required. I can't think of any PHB2 race that would be allowed in Dark Sun if you are a purist about setting canon.
So does WotC count on selling Dark Sun and appease the fanbase, or does it hope enough of the fanbase likes a little bit of reinterpretation enough to buy it anyway? With less sourcebooks being released, do they hope people with an RPG budget will buy the book out of curiosity for the Psionic rules? I'd say the better money would be to make the Dark Sun setting a backdrop for showcasing those psionic rules, rather than releasing a full on campaign guide like the Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting. Wider audience (psionics fans are larger than Dark Sun fans) and the Dark Sun fans who are interested in playing 4e will pick it up for the psionics rules system.
However, there was talk on incorporating Birthright elements into future supplemental material, specifically keeps, bloodlines, etc.
YES! Make this happen WotC. I'm kind of meh on the Birthright setting in general, but I LOVE the idea of domain rulership and management, castles, keeps, and fighting wars, along with bloodlines and bloodlines powers.
As far as future releases go, I want Dark Sun as the next setting, and psionics in the PHB3. I also want an expanded Manual of the Planes 2, or a new setting that really supports an amalgamated Planescape/Spelljammer style game.
The beauty of the soul shines out when a man bears with composure one heavy mischance after another, not because he does not feel them, but because he is a man of high and heroic temper
Come check out & discuss my favourite setting "Birthright" at The Piazza or at it's home "Birthright" at the Wotc forum.
Because some games shouldn't be forgotten Alternity.
This is my inner cynic talking, but I'm generally wary of anything that advertises as "New!" "Original!" Especially coming from WotC. It'd likely involve something like "Instead of gnomes, HALFLINGS wear hats!" "DWARVES UNDERWATER!"*
Quite frankly, I don't want a new campaign setting, for the selfish fact that I'll also likely enjoy it, and want to spend money on it. I all ready want to work on my own, don't tempt me with new, shiny things!
*I say this even though I really do enjoy Eberron. It did play "Musical assumptions" with the racial and generic fantasy habits. But, still.
If they want to do an orginal setting, they should definately do another setting search. I think that was one of the best things that happened during the 3e era.
__________________ Oni
"Each man, one way.
Each horse, one stance.
Each church, one buddha.
Each master to his own technique."
This is my inner cynic talking, but I'm generally wary of anything that advertises as "New!" "Original!" Especially coming from WotC. It'd likely involve something like "Instead of gnomes, HALFLINGS wear hats!" "DWARVES UNDERWATER!"*
Quite frankly, I don't want a new campaign setting, for the selfish fact that I'll also likely enjoy it, and want to spend money on it. I all ready want to work on my own, don't tempt me with new, shiny things!
*I say this even though I really do enjoy Eberron. It did play "Musical assumptions" with the racial and generic fantasy habits. But, still.
Better a new campaign setting than WotC butchering an existing fantasy setting to fit its new game.
__________________ Everything about RPGs is subjective, so everything I say about them is I my opinion and not hard facts
Having a backstory is good. Using this backstory in game is better. And for that you need background skills.
4E, the game where you play HSMFOS
Heroic
Only good, or at least unaligned adventurers are supported and no monster you can fight is good aligned.
Super-
The PCs become masters in any skill automatically and it is impossible for them to be bad at a mundane task
Mutants
Compared to NPCs of the same strength, PCs poses a ungodly amount of HP and can withstand huge mountains of punishment. That or they can spontaneously regenerate wounds.
From Outer Space
Yet despite no matter how powerful the PCs become, they can never do anything special what the "natives" (=NPCs) can do like animating a skeleton.
Better a new campaign setting than WotC butchering an existing fantasy setting to fit its new game.
I find the lack of a 4E specific setting that showcases the systems internal paradigms and design philosophy to be one of the biggest disappointments from WotC. And that's saying alot as IMHO, they have made a number of them.
Retconning older settings may please a number of that settings fans, but it will in all likelyhood alienate a good part of the balance, causing more strife and negativity. The job (hack) that WotC did with FR is a classic example. 4E has a very different pacing and flavor compared to earlier editions of D&D, and broke a number of "sacred" cows in its development. Why can't WotC deliver a setting that is made without those cows and earlier design goals?
Anyways ... count me in as being "interested" if WotC does create a new setting for 4E. And count me as VERY skeptical if all they do is try to "4E" yet another earlier setting.
__________________ Just be thankful I'm not a twin.
I find the lack of a 4E specific setting that showcases the systems internal paradigms and design philosophy to be one of the biggest disappointments from WotC. And that's saying alot as IMHO, they have made a number of them.
They're less than a year into the edition. What more do you want from them? Within one year of their launch, they'll have brought out both of the most popular campaign settings there are under their new system. How much faster do you want them to work on getting you your exemplary setting? Also, you might not agree with how they changed Forgotten Realms, but Eberron is going to fit seamlessly with 4E mechanics.
Quote:
Retconning older settings may please a number of that settings fans, but it will in all likelyhood alienate a good part of the balance, causing more strife and negativity. The job (hack) that WotC did with FR is a classic example. 4E has a very different pacing and flavor compared to earlier editions of D&D, and broke a number of "sacred" cows in its development. Why can't WotC deliver a setting that is made without those cows and earlier design goals?
The changes to Forgotten Realms had nothing to do with the new edition's pacing and mechanics, and everything to do with how people felt that the realms were completely inaccessible. And before we digress into whether or not they were, there are thousands of people who completely agree that the new book is much more conducive to running a game of Dungeon & Dragons, whether or not it has the exasperated body of lore that it always had.
But I'm sure I'm wrong.
Quote:
Anyways ... count me in as being "interested" if WotC does create a new setting for 4E. And count me as VERY skeptical if all they do is try to "4E" yet another earlier setting.
They're less than a year into the edition. What more do you want from them? Within one year of their launch, they'll have brought out both of the most popular campaign settings there are under their new system. How much faster do you want them to work on getting you your exemplary setting? Also, you might not agree with how they changed Forgotten Realms, but Eberron is going to fit seamlessly with 4E mechanics.
Since you asked what I would want from WotC, for a system that was what ... 3 or 4 years in the making, with a very definitive setting used in its framework, I would hope to see an actual world that illustrates those themes. The fact that WotC went with a FR re-boot rather than a new setting designed for 4E, is a mistake from my point of view. It brought with it a lot of baggage and unnecessary confrontation.
IMO, Eberron may very well be the best fit of the existing D&D settings to transition into 4E. But I'm not willing to applaude WotC for a "seamless" move before the setting is even published. I have high hopes, but I've learned to temper my enthusiasm.
Quote:
The changes to Forgotten Realms had nothing to do with the new edition's pacing and mechanics, and everything to do with how people felt that the realms were completely inaccessible.
The FR changes (whether you like them or not) had a lot to do with the switch to the new system. Looking at just one element ... the rationalization for the elimination of the "Vancian Magaic" mechanic had to take place to allow for 4E's new magic paradigm. Which was clearly explained away by the spellplague / death of Mystra. At least in this case, fluff was clearly trumped by mechanics.
Again I'll say that if we see a new 4E focused setting I'll be quite excited. If we see nothing but another re-imagining of an older setting (even though I am a HUGE BR, SJ and Planescape fan) I'll be disappointed and more cautious in my enthusiasm.
If done right, settings can really enhance a system. That's the type of support I'd like to see from WotC.
Just my 2 cents.
__________________ Just be thankful I'm not a twin.
it's interesting that phrase is 4e 'revisits.' Given the treatment of Planescape and SpellJammer it's nice to see that they're working on ways to treat these materials without doing the full three item treatment.
I'm sort of sad to see Maztica and Red Steel on that list since they're the only Meso-American treatments we've seen so far, but I also think that new treatment would do just as well.
It's kind of encouraging to see that neither Al-Quadim nor Kara Tur made the 'Do not Vist' list, but that hope is just in service of their doing some articles or general books on adjusting DnD to different cultures/story styles.
Last edited by Dr. Strangemonkey; 27th February 2009 at 08:08 AM..
The changes to Forgotten Realms had nothing to do with the new edition's pacing and mechanics, and everything to do with how people felt that the realms were completely inaccessible.
So, Elminster just starting to have one encounter fireball or something like that has nothing to do with the new system?
That Plague of Spells (?) was created just to fit the nerf on mages.
Forgotten Realms inacessible? So how come Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale and Neverwinter Nights computer games attract so many people?
See, I'm not a FR fan but none of my friends that loved Faerūn enjoyed the changes.
I like 4E a lot but I would rather create a new world instead of what was made with FR...
__________________ And in the end, the love you take is equal to the love you make
Last edited by avin; 27th February 2009 at 12:59 PM..
Well, 4th ed Paladins would fit into Dark Sun, where as 3rd ed ones wouldn't!
A Paladin of an SK, or a paladin who defends the Veiled Alliance etc make sense...a holy warriror with a steed etc, doesn't!
Tieflings and dragonborn would definately NOT fit into Dark Sun, except as extremely rare mutants (which are a common theme in the setting, spawned by the mysterious processes of the world, or the Pristine Tower if you like the cheesy official history crappola, or plane crossing travellers, or hide outs form aeons ago)
You can't run dragonborn as dray, without realizing dray are a *hidden* race on Athas.
Warlocks don't fit in either, unless you make them linked to elemental forces, such as genies or Spirits of the Land, and then you'd need a new pact: elemental.
They are also arcane, so would they be defiler/preservers?
Dark Sun and Spelljammer definatley deserve 4th ed treatment!
With Ravenloft done again some how (I hated how they forced it to change, break up yadda yadda)
There seems to be an underlying philosophy in a lot of 4e design that worries me when it comes to new campaign settings:
"Everyone can use every book in every game."
I'm concerned because it means that no setting is allowed to exclude anything. It can be warped, but it must be included. It also means that no setting can redefine what the game is about: the core 4e gameplay and model of heroism is universal.
These disturb me because often, new settings are about what is excluded, and also about re-defining what a "hero" is (such as by taking inspiration from other genrea).
If 4e doesn't permit this, then every setting 4e pops out will look less like a new setting, and more 4e with a different palette.
4e is about killing dragons in dungeon. Their heroes are action-packed team players with flashy moves.
Ravenloft should not be about killing vampires in castles. Its heroes should be troubled individuals whose power is a threat to everyone and themselves.
Dark Sun should not be about killing bugs in the desert. Its heroes should be brutal, stone-hearted survivalists who will do anything for a drop of water.
Eberron should not be (entirely) about killing dinosaurs on the lightning-rail. Its heroes should be pulpy vigilantes who fight weirdness and evil because it's weird and evil, and noirish antiheroes who get into situations that often leave them worse for the wear.
When I'm playing a different setting, I'm not looking for Same Stuff, Different Dungeon.
I'm concerned that that's all 4e will be able to provide.
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
