D&D 5E Which of these settings do you want to see for D&D Next?

Knightfall · Jan 25, 2012

Elf Witch said:
I like the idea of support for older settings. Some of those settings have been out of print for such a long time that for a lot of new players they would be something new.

This is why I'd really like to see Mystara make a comeback. It hasn't been supported since near the end of the 2e era, and while I really like those products, the line was cancelled so fast that the Known World never got any major support. Add to that the Savage Coast and Hollow World and you have a unique setting with unique races and monsters.

One could argue that Birthright might be ripe for an update, as well. Yes, they could simply pull the dominion mechanics out of the setting and apply it to the base game, but that wouldn't bring the die hard Birthright fans back into the fold. (I'm not one of them, BTW.) Birthright should not go through another edition without some real support.

Both Al-Qadim and Kara-Tur are natural expansions to the Realms, which, I feel, is going to be a big deal from the launch of D&D Next onward. I don't think the Realms will be only getting three books this time around. Maztica would be in this category as well, but if WotC keeps the current timeline then Maztica fades into oblivion.

If WotC created a new setting that combined the best parts of Planescape and Spelljammer, I wouldn't complain. Purists might want the original settings, but I don't think that's going to happen. (I'd buy them.)

I think the best setting for WotC to get behind, besides the big three*, is Ravenloft. The mainstream market is vampire and werewolf crazy right now. And as long as the designers stay true to the origins of the setting, it could become as popular as the Forgotten Realms (including board games, novels, and CRPGs).

Imagine a Ravenloft MMO. A grim horror game with the classic concepts of golems, vampires, werewolves, etc. A video game that is more about fear than power-gaming.

*Forgotten Realms, Dragonlance, and Greyhawk. (Personally, I also put Dark Sun into this category.)

Dungeonosophy · Jan 25, 2012

cperkins said:
That's a tough question. If D&D is looking back to its roots, Greyhawk is a must for me. After that, I think a new setting that incorporates elements of past worlds would be a great way to pull fans together.

Isn't Nerath (Nentir Vale) already a sort of distillation of various D&D worlds?

Even though I'm a "Mystara-man" myself, I'd be okay with Oerth or Nerath being the default 5e setting, as long as there was overt mention of Gateways to all the other D&D Worlds.

This would be paired with a WotC webpage devoted to each World, with all products and novels ever published neatly displayed for download. Some PDFs would be for more than one World--for example, The Keep on the Borderland in Greyhawk, Mystara, and Nerath.

Glade Riven · Jan 25, 2012

Brand New Setting, Dark Sun, Eberron. I like Dark Sun and Eberron, and I'd like to see something new, with no previous edition baggage.

BASHMAN · Jan 25, 2012

Mystara; but I would want Hollow World and Savage Coast included in the setting book. If that stuff will fit in Poor Wizard's Almanac, it will fit in the setting book for the planet.

While I'd prefer they keep "the Immortals" I'd accept it if they started calling them "Gods".

I think this may be likely, though, because they are making the Caves of Chaos as the first playtest module; and that is set in Mystara (Karameikos specifically).

Mercurius · Jan 25, 2012

All and none of the above (or should I say most and none). I'd like to see WotC lightly support every major and one or two minor settings in some form or fashion, especially considering 5E is supposedly meant to support play styles from every edition and era, but focus on a new setting that they develop and flesh out with ongoing support.

BronzeDragon · Jan 26, 2012

Good to see Birthright in the poll.

It was simply the most flavorful setting ever done for any RPG. My recommendations would be (for the new edition) Birthright, Planescape and Greyhawk.

Edit: had a brain fart....apparently I'm one of the only people that liked BR....oh well...

Ampolitor · Jan 26, 2012

birthright

Wow I loved BR, the best setting,you didn't have to be a lord and could
Just use the world which is what we did. What a fantastic setting.

Man in the Funny Hat · Jan 26, 2012

New setting, Greyhawk, Spelljammer. One way or another I don't care what they do with the rest. Doesn't mean I don't like them necessarily - just that I don't care what they think they want to do with them going forward.

Blacky the Blackball · Jan 26, 2012

I went for the "A new setting" option.

Time and again we've seen WotC update a setting to use the latest edition, and seen fans complain and whine that they've ruined it forever.

Even today you can see posts on various message boards from people saying they didn't move to Edition X because they didn't like the changes that WotC did to their favourite setting when changing it to suite that edition.

So I say they should leave the existing settings alone and create a new setting.

Existing players and GMs aren't idiots. If they want to use the new rules in their old setting they can sort out whatever combination of setting changes and house rules suits their group best and it can be different for each group.

That way everyone is happy. Lovers of existing settings don't feel their settings have been "ruined". Those who want to use an older setting with the latest rules can do so in exactly the manner they want. And those who want a new setting designed to accompany the new rules get one.