4e / GSL Two-Volume Settings and the Legacy of Editions Past

[Ahnirades]

As most of us are no doubt aware, Wizard’s current setting publication model comprises of a player’s guide, a DM’s reference and a single adventure, repeated annually. It’s a straightforward approach, intended to offer breadth of choice without requiring the enormous buy in that the decades-old monoliths of previous editions insisted on.

Yet as I flicked through the Player’s Guide to Eberron I found myself asking the kind of basic, nuts and bolts questions that any self-respecting introductory book should answer. What does the lightning rail actually look like? Or an elemental carriage? What are the limits of magical technology and how does its use impact on daily life? Beyond that were a host of more detailed queries unlikely to be answered under the two volume format.

My solution was to go online, where I eventually ended up ordering a pile of 3.x books. Doing so led to the realisation that a detail orientated GM like myself is virtually required to adopt the literature of an earlier edition if he wants to properly explore a world published under the current one. As someone who had very little interest in 3.x the sense of irony I felt regarding my situation was pronounced.

Now, whilst I have no doubt that the Eberron Campaign Guide will be as comprehensive a book as it can be, the lack of further planned support means it will be a broad-brush treatment only. Great for some, not so good for others. Ideally I’d like to see supplemental material appearing via the DDI, perhaps as a series of lengthy articles featuring modular, downloadable content that complements and expands upon the published material. The one-setting-per-year embargo could still be enforced, with the next annual release heralding the end of Setting X's run as it makes way for Setting Y's monthly support.

In short, I’d like to see Wizards adopt a model that accomodates the subset of their userbase whom desire a fuller realisation of their worlds.

[Fallen Seraph]

Posted this also on RPG.net:

Well actually Wizard is planning on having every month articles dealing with their campaign settings so for now Eberron and FR. So I would say you are in luck in that what you liked to see is gonna happen.

I am quite a fan of this format since it means each setting will get equal treatment and quality/support. You won't need to divide the team working on Y because they need to continue to produce books for X.

[Jhaelen]

Originally Posted by Ahnirades

My solution was to go online, where I eventually ended up ordering a pile of 3.x books.

That's my solution, as well.
The 'fluff'-oriented 3E books will never be outdated. They're an excellent source about the setting.

Actually, I even consider some of 2E stuff essential. Take the monstrous manuals and compare them with the 4E monster manual. If the monsters didn't have art, you'd often not even have a clue what they look like!

I found this especially aggravating in Open Grave. It's chock-full with new monsters (167 if I counted right) but there's only one picture for about one in 6 or so... unless you already know the monster from a previous edition, you're out of luck.

So, yeah, try to get hold of those old source books!

[Ahnirades]

Originally Posted by Jhaelen

That's my solution, as well.
The 'fluff'-oriented 3E books will never be outdated. They're an excellent source about the setting.

Actually, I even consider some of 2E stuff essential. Take the monstrous manuals and compare them with the 4E monster manual. If the monsters didn't have art, you'd often not even have a clue what they look like!

I found this especially aggravating in Open Grave. It's chock-full with new monsters (167 if I counted right) but there's only one picture for about one in 6 or so... unless you already know the monster from a previous edition, you're out of luck.

So, yeah, try to get hold of those old source books!

On another forum I suggested the idea of a third online magazine that deals exclusively with setting content. Each world would get two or three years of monthly articles, eventually being replaced with support for newer settings. Package it with DDI and you're good to go.

Now I'm unsure how financially viable this idea is, but from an infrastructural perspective everything is already in place.

[Shemeska]

Yeah, the current model isn't good if you like setting support/detail. Even assuming material through the DDI coming out each month, the 4e support doesn't seem like it would amount to even the content of a single 3e supplement book. And under the 4e model, you can't just buy supplemental material for a setting you like, you have to subscribe to the DDI which would have you paying for material for settings you might not even like. Adding a by-the-article format for purchasing DDI stuff would settle that latter problem, but I can't see them adding it because full subscriptions would probably suffer as a result.

Additionally, the current 4e one-setting-per-year and nothing beyond model would also "not divide the team" but it also would have designers working on material they might not have any experience or knowledge writing for. A greater tendency for radical setting changes (see FR) and setting continuity might crop up as a direct result of that.

Setting support isn't a highlight of the current 4e model.

[amethal]

Originally Posted by Shemeska

Setting support isn't a highlight of the current 4e model.

I like new settings, and I'm perfectly happy with limited setting support provided that is made clear up front.

What I want is new settings. I am glad Forgotten Realms is out of the way, I might look at the Eberron Campaign Guide, but I already have more than enough Eberron stuff for my simple tastes.

I'm anxiously awaiting the announcement of the new setting, but now it looks like there is a reasonable chance it might be flippin' Dragonlance. Been there, done that.

Where is the new setting to show off what 4th edition can do? I don't even play 4th edition, but I'd buy the setting.

[Gothmog]

Originally Posted by amethal

I like new settings, and I'm perfectly happy with limited setting support provided that is made clear up front.

What I want is new settings. I am glad Forgotten Realms is out of the way, I might look at the Eberron Campaign Guide, but I already have more than enough Eberron stuff for my simple tastes.

I'm anxiously awaiting the announcement of the new setting, but now it looks like there is a reasonable chance it might be flippin' Dragonlance. Been there, done that.

Where is the new setting to show off what 4th edition can do? I don't even play 4th edition, but I'd buy the setting.

I agree, I am enjoying the new way of handling the settings. They are left more open, and there is no need to worry about "canon". A good DM can come up with plenty of interesting details and plots on their own. The new setting format supplies all the basics you need, along with lots of plot hooks, rumors, and tips for customizing the world to what YOU want it to be.

While the FR books were good, and the Eberron PG is great (as I'm sure the Campaign Guide will be), I REALLY want to see new settings, not rehashes of older settings. Maybe eventually WotC should do Dragonlance, Dark Sun, etc- but I'd much rather see a new dark fantasy PoL setting showcasing and highlighting many of 4E's flavor and tone. 4E needs to establish a setting with its own identity, much like 3e did with Eberron. So if you're listening WotC, PLEASE give us a new setting for 4E.

[malraux]

Originally Posted by Ahnirades

My solution was to go online, where I eventually ended up ordering a pile of 3.x books.

If only there were a way to avoid worrying about finding increasingly rare OOP book, but instead to allow consumers a way to purchase electronic versions of previous editions' books, maybe in some sort of document format that was portable from computer to computer. If only the market could provide that.....

More seriously, I agree that older editions have a lot to offer current edition DMs. Eberron is a great example where the past sourcebooks have a lot of ideas that can easily be brought to the current edition.

[Asmor]

I really like the way they're handling the settings as well. There're only so many resources to go around (and I've heard that one of the reasons TSR failed was that they were spread too thin trying to support the core game and so many different settings which each demanded their own entire product lines).

As a fan of Eberron, I hadn't noticed a lack of description of the lightning rails, as I've really only skimmed the EPG so far and that's not the sort of thing which would have caught my attention. For what it's worth, even in 3e the best idea I had of them was "a magical train," and frankly that's pretty accurate. The only thing that might be a bit hard to picture without adequate description/illustration is the actual track the lightning rail travels on.

[Barcode]

I think the strategy makes sense for the old settings.

1) FR - I am the target market for the 100 year jump/spellplague. I never bought a FR book in my 25 year gaming history, and I wasn't about to try bearing the weight of that setting. However, I did buy the 4e books. I still probably won't run anything in the setting, but I do like a lot of what I see and may try some judicious ports into:

2) Eberron - I have every 3e book created for this setting, and PDF's of every Dragonshards article. I even have a few Dragon/Dungeon magazines with Eberron articles in it (the only previous Dragons were purchased back in the Phil and Dixie days). I don't really want to repurchase all the fluff, so the level of detail is fine with me - I have plenty of other source material to draw from, but I can see the frustration of a DM who is just seeing Eberron for the first time and wants more than what has been provided.

3) If 2010 = Dragonlance, I can probably bring myself to buy two books, but if it were more, I probably wouldn't buy any. I'm just not that interested in the setting beyond mild curiosity.

4) If 2010 = Dark Sun, I'm down for as many books as they could produce, and will still probably troll eBay for the original stuff.

5) A completely original setting? If it were compelling, I'd probably want more than two books and a few Dragon articles. If not, then not.

[Hjorimir]

This may sound a bit weird, but I don't want there to be a ton of books for any setting. I LOVE the current model. LOVE IT! I don't want to have to worry about things that happen (and that I develop) in my campaign to contend with newly published books. I like the idea of "here is a setting, here are some details, make of it what you will." Everything that isn't defined is tabula rasa and I don't want that to change later.

If the next setting is Dragonlance, I'm certainly going to buy (it would be the first 4e setting that I would buy as I have little to no interest in FR or Eberron), but I (like others) would love a new 4e setting that really embraces the PoL concept in some interesting way.

[Khairn]

Originally Posted by amethal

I like new settings, and I'm perfectly happy with limited setting support provided that is made clear up front.

What I want is new settings. I am glad Forgotten Realms is out of the way, I might look at the Eberron Campaign Guide, but I already have more than enough Eberron stuff for my simple tastes.

I'm anxiously awaiting the announcement of the new setting, but now it looks like there is a reasonable chance it might be flippin' Dragonlance. Been there, done that.

Where is the new setting to show off what 4th edition can do? I don't even play 4th edition, but I'd buy the setting.

Amethal, you're preaching to the choir!

The lack of a true 4E setting, built to integrate with and showcase the system, is one of WotC's critical 4E failures IMHO. As a GM who likes a detailed setting and who doesn't have the time to do it myself, the lack of a new 4E world is a problem.

On the original topic of the Annual 2 Book settings that WotC is pumping out, Eberron looks promising but FR was a bust when it came to attracting me to the world. I can appreciate that this skeletal approach leaves room for GM's to individualize the setting, but for those GM's and players who want additional detail, they are simply out of luck.

[malraux]

The only thing I feel is lacking in the current format is adventures. As a member of the lazy dm's guild (or at least I would be if I ever got around to finishing the application) I really would like an easy way to run an Eberron campaign without having to write the plot, all the encounters, etc, myself or having to transpose a generic adventure to setting specific, as the Eberron setting pretty much demands certain elements. I actually think this is a role that Dragon could fill reasonably easily, by have additional adventure paths for each setting. IE, every dragon would have a SoW adventure, then either an Eberron or FR adventure on alternating months, plus some other stand alone adventures.

[catsclaw227]

Do you remember the EnWorld member that would trip out each month that Dragon/Dungeon would come out for Paizo, complaining that his setting wasn't well represented? I think it was for Eberron, and he would rant and rave, claim he could write better adventures for it than the guys at Dungeon (Paizo) but never actually submitted anything?

I really hope that we don't see that kind of Setting Envy from people that feel their favorite isn't getting the love. It was like watching a slo-mo traffic accident.

[Shroomy]

All I know is that the current set-up has significantly lowered the barrier of entry to the established campaign settings and will personally get me to buy pretty much any one that WoTC decides to release. I came back to D&D in 2005, so it was too costly for me to buy all the 3e and 3.5e FR books released at that point, even though it had been my setting of choice in late 1e and 2e (Grey Box for the Win!), and Eberron was not much better after I got into that. All I can say is that I'm lucky I lived in an area where poor college students had to sell all their stuff at the end of the semester for food and beer money.

[Lord Mhoram]

I've never once playing in a published campaign setting (the closest I came was Spelljammer, where I took chunks of it and adapted it to my world for it's fantasy space). Anecdotally, I know no GM (in person) that has every used a campaign setting (small numbers there, under 20).

So the current system is ideal for people like me - I can grab the player's guide for the new rules and such (my world now has both Dragonmarks, a Prophecy and the Spellplauge), and I can look at the setting book itself and see if there is anything I want to steal. I know I can buy into a setting and not worry about needing to buy every supplement to get all the details of a setting (if I want to use one).

I also like that with the "new year, new setting" approach, we can get a scattershot of many setting each with a different feel.

[ggroy]

When I first read the 4E Forgotten Realms books, they seemed kind of on the lackluster side in comparison to the 3E Forgotten Realms campaign guide.

At the time many old 3.5E books were ending up in bargain bins, where I picked up many of the 3E/3.5E FR splatbooks highly discounted. (Many for less than $15 a pop). In the end after reading through the 3.5E FR books, many of them were largely mediocre and lackluster too. The few outstanding FR books were the original 3E FR campaign guide and maybe also the Underdark and FR Faiths and Pantheons books. The region specific books looked like as if they were generated semi-randomly by one of those online random dungeon generators (ie. Unapproachable East, etc ...). Other FR books looked like they were cut-and-paste jobs of other WotC 3E/3.5E D&D generic splatbooks, with FR specific fluff added in (ie. Dragons of Faerun, Power of Faerun, Champions of Valor, Champions of Ruin, etc ...).

Overall most of the 3E/3.5E Forgotten Realms splatbooks were largely a disappointment.

I also picked up all of the 3.5E Eberron books found in the bargain bins at FLGS in town. Besides the first few Eberron books (ie. campaign guide, Sharn, etc ...), most of the Eberron splatbooks were largely mediocre and lackluster in the end. From a casual reading of the 4E Eberron Player's Guide at a local "big box" bookstore, it doesn't look very impressive. Hopefully the 4E Eberron campaign guide will be better.

If most of the 3.5E Forgotten Realms and Eberron books were not spectacular sellers, then I wouldn't be surprised to see why WotC is only pursuing the strategy of 2 books + 1 module for each new setting released each year for 4E. I remember seeing several 3.5E FR and Eberron books in the bargain section of several "big box" bookstores, in piles of 10 or more copies each.

[Asmor]

Originally Posted by ggroy

I also picked up all of the 3.5E Eberron books found in the bargain bins at FLGS in town. Besides the first few Eberron books (ie. campaign guide, Sharn, etc ...), most of the Eberron splatbooks were largely mediocre and lackluster in the end.

Just wanted to point out that the 3e Eberron Player's Guide is absolutely fantastic, and I highly, highly recommend it for anyone remotely interested in Eberron, regardless of edition. It's set up like an encyclopedia, with alphabetized "articles" on most of the things you might want to know about the setting.

I've only skimmed the 4e EPG briefly, but I like it. The back of the book actually has a pretty good setting guide with a quick overview of most of the points of interest.

[Dice4Hire]

I think that the two book plus an adventure is a good way to handle settings. Yes, if you love the setting it is not nearly enough, but if you only use it sparingly or not at all, it is good.

I would rather that WOTC do a bit about multiple campaigns rather than support one or two ad nauseum, as they have done the last couple editions. Especially as I do not like either of the ones they supported in 3.5.

[sckeener]

Originally Posted by Jhaelen

The 'fluff'-oriented 3E books will never be outdated. They're an excellent source about the setting.

Actually, I even consider some of 2E stuff essential.

Agreed. Even though Unther is gone, I still view 2nd ed FR Old Empires to be important for running campaigns in that region.

I remember running players through adventures dealing with Mulhorand and they had no clue where I was getting my information from because they started playing in 3rd edition! The players had scattered paragraphs in 3e dealing with the region whereas I had a sourcebook. The extra detail was well worth it.