D&D 5E How WotC will approach the campaign settings?

Well, first of all i think that what we saw in the UA will be the digital presentation of other campaign settings/rules. I don't think it will be the final saying on this matter. I don't hope for it too. I think they keep the whole setting thing secret as they kept secret the Sword Coast Legends PC game. I find it amazing that they released information so late. It is their policy and although frustrating for us I can understand it.

I think it will be foolish to not exploit all capabilites of their brand, especially now that have some indications how they handle their material: outsource. Except for the 3 core books and the DM screen all the adventures have been made by 3rd part companies. They kept a supervising role and most likely the general outline of the adventures. So, probably there is a probability to see something that in the campaing setting field. Until they have concrete to say we will get their playtested notes of various campaign. I wouldn't surprised the next one to be the Dark Sun one since some time ago I heard they were playing testing in their office this too.

Evenglare said:

How will they approach the settings? Apparently with a 5-7 white page document with no formatting if that Eberron document is any indication (which so far that's all we have to go on.)

Click to expand...

It's unformatted because it's a first draft. It's like the playtest documents...

I think they are going to super-size Manual of the Planes / PlaneScape. One huge book that focuses on each realm as sections and helps you place your own within that structure.

That or bring back the gazettes.

SkidAce said:

I would like to mention that the 3e FRCS is the best campaign setting book EVER published (imho).

And I have a homebrew world, and I still think its one of my best resources, and best laid out campaign setting.

Click to expand...

Yeah, it's basically the gold standard. That's why I called it the authoritative guide and not, say, the 4e FRCS, which would be the most recent version. Given the emphasis on story in 5e, I think an immersive, exhaustive approach like the 3e book would be what they're looking for. Besides, hasn't Ed Greenwood been kinda quiet recently? Be a nice thing for Gen Con, or even Christmas....

Nellisir said:

Yeah, it's basically the gold standard. That's why I called it the authoritative guide and not, say, the 4e FRCS, which would be the most recent version. Given the emphasis on story in 5e, I think an immersive, exhaustive approach like the 3e book would be what they're looking for.

Click to expand...

But the issue with a 5E FR campaign setting book as exhaustive as the 3E book is two-fold:

1) How many man-hours of writing, developing, illustration, and mapmaking would it take to produce it, and how much would it cost to make? Is the current staff of D&D R&D capable of producing a product as extensive as that?

2) Does the fact that it would be a setting that takes place in probably around 1489 DR (ten years after the 4E book, and still 100+ years after the 3E book because they wouldn't be editing out the Spellplague and timejump from the history) make this book less of a desired product for a large swathe of the Realms fandom, *because* it doesn't eliminate the Spellplague and 100 year jump from existence? Do Realms fans who normally would buy a setting book refuse to do so in this case specifically because it maintains a hated part of Realms history for a lot of them?

I completely understand many people's desires for a new setting book. I do. But let's be real here-- a good percentage of the Realms populace won't embrace and will not buy a product that assumes everything that happened in the 4E Realms still happened (even if a lot of unpopular stuff gets "written out" via magic and the reforming of the Tablets of Fate). Which means a percentage of the people they might expect to buy said product actually won't. So if you can't count on the sales of your gaming populace... why would you even want to attempt to spend the money to produce it when there might be a good chance you'd lose money on the endeavor?

Ironically... the only real viable solution would be to do what so many other game companies do, which is a Kickstarter or Indiegogo campaign so that they can know *beforehand* just how many people would actually buy the product, and how much money they could expect to bring in at the top (so they then knew how much money they could viably spend to produce the book.) But yet... I suspect WotC would get CRUCIFIED for trying it. The song and dance would be "How dare a corporation like WotC/Hasbro demand money from us when they have so much money already!!!" If people think their PR has been shoddy for a lot of things before... this would be like WotC was coming over to their house and shooting their dog.

I really do think it's just *too early* for them to consider a campaign setting, because they just don't know yet how much money their non-core 5E products will bring in to know how much money they viably could spend to produce it. Maybe once Elemental Evil gets released (the first product to include a lot of player-focused material) and they can see what kind of financial solvency their product give them... they'll know just what they have to work with for a new campaign setting book.

I would imagine that more quick and dirty patches or updates like the one we saw for Eberron would get more people interested in purchasing some of the older materials, and they'll be able to use sales for those to help figure out which settings might be worth compiling into new print products, if not revising.

Let's say the development of the 5E FR setting costs $100k.

Let's say WotC would make just $10 per book (assuming MSRP of $60-ish).

I am pretty sure that they would sell at least 10.000 copies of the book and break even regardless of which subset of fans get butthurt by the choice of era (which doesn't have to be 1489 exclusively... they can always turn the whole thing into "what ifs" and alternate timelines, after all). The alternative - not publishing the setting at all - means that they are letting it go down the drain.

And Elemental Evil and FRCS are hardly comparable. Many people who don't even play 5e (or don't play D&D at all) will buy the FRCS nonetheless, as reading material.

neobolts said:

A single big hardcover book that devotes 20 or so pages to each past campaign setting (complete with a map and some races and class paths as needed for each) would be amazing. It would be a "Manual of the Multiverse" Campaign Setting, with the ability to dig deeper with future books or within modules. It would be similar to how Golarion gives PF a ton of unified set pieces. Plus since they seeded this concept in the 5e core books, it wouldn't feel forced onto newer players.

Click to expand...

I've been thinking we may see something similar. Based on the Eberron material and their approach to the Realms, I have a mental image of "Unearthed Arcana: Worlds of D&D". A single book that gives a broad overview of each setting, any minor mechanical widgets it might need (so this would have to come after a psionics supplement ) and--the key thing for leveraging their backstory--a pointer to dndclassics.com for more detail. The book would also contain a "Rules Conversion" appendix for how to convert previous editions into 5E.

ehren37 said:

I disagree, that's just making people buy junk they don't want for stuff they do. 20 pages falls into the "why bother" category.

Click to expand...

I would buy this. In truth, most of the old settings aren't going to get an updated book. This would be tremendous for those campaign settings. Just for the nostalgia factor. There was a Dragon Magazine that did a 3e conversion of Spelljammer that ran about 15 pages. It was one of my favorite issues.

DEFCON 1 said:

Ironically... the only real viable solution would be to do what so many other game companies do, which is a Kickstarter or Indiegogo campaign so that they can know *beforehand* just how many people would actually buy the product, and how much money they could expect to bring in at the top (so they then knew how much money they could viably spend to produce the book.) But yet... I suspect WotC would get CRUCIFIED for trying it.

Click to expand...

I would love this. They would indeed take some heat, but just saying "We aren't certain which classic settings are viable. Vote with your money." would at least ring true. I was introduced to D&D in 1990 and started playing regularly in 1995. We used homebrew, Dragonlance, and Realms. I don't know jack about Greyhawk or Mystara, they were (IMO) before my time. And i would totally love to see launched core books for them in my lifetime.

DEFCON 1 said:

I really do think it's just *too early* for them to consider a campaign setting, because they just don't know yet how much money their non-core 5E products will bring in to know how much money they viably could spend to produce it. Maybe once Elemental Evil gets released (the first product to include a lot of player-focused material) and they can see what kind of financial solvency their product give them... they'll know just what they have to work with for a new campaign setting book.

Click to expand...

They should be out in front on this, which doesn't have to mean a book in my hands tomorrow. They need to energize the market and drum up sales, not gingerly test the waters. "Setting X: Summer 2017." That would make my day!