Matrix Sorcica
Hero
We can hope.
Nentir Vale Coming to Dungeons and Dragons
Jester David
Hero
Which is a giant, giant maybe.
We literally have ZERO evidence one way or another.
Mearls is pretty on-message that this is "his" take on the Vale. Just like Crawford did his own take on Ravenloft some time ago. If they ever do a product, they might just as easily go with the original, pulling what still works from this document and turning to the original for the rest.
And if they do a Vale Gazetteer, it's likely to be a side product on the Guild. Which means it's easiest to tap freelancers to do that job. Maybe Rich Baker and Robert J Schwab. Or Rob Heinsoo. Who might not care about Mearls' vision.
Maybe. But there were two years between Ravenloft and Eberron. We might not see another for two years. One each June might be doable.
But let's go rocket fast for the sake of argument. Every six months, with Ravnica counting as one. So two new releases next year.
They'll almost certainly go for the big settings first.
Dark Sun and Planescape are the big ones left. But they might spread them out. Then it's Greyhawk, Dragonlance, and Spelljammer.
So we're looking at 2021 before the third tier settings might see release, likely starting with Mystara.
But that's a long, long time away.
Will the show still be on? Will streaming games still be popular? Will Heroes have the Vale broken away from the core assumptions of the setting and become something entirely else? Will they still be making 5e or will the market have dried up? Even if 5e is doing strong, with class settings still have the same appeal?
I don't think all the content released for 4e counts as being essential to the setting. In the same way we don't need everything released for 3e to update Greyhawk. It was created for the game and not the world.
When one thinks of Nentire Vale and the adventures and accessories in that world, they don't think about wilden seekers and shardmind runepriests.
If they have to do all the classes and races, do they need to update every single feat as well?
The setting was expanded as they added content, but that was typically made up as they went along. As a Dungeon Master might do as they explored.
What makes Nentir special for you is the lore you added and the campaigns you had that fleshed out the world. But those details will be entirely different to someone who looked at the names on the map and made them entirely different than your campaign or what later sourcebooks did with that same locale.
Expanding beyond the details in the DMG will always run the risk of doing exactly what you're complaining Mearls is doing: changing the setting.
So?
DMs are always going to change things and make it their own. Find ways of surprising their players. There's very little difference between altering a known world to surprise fans who read all the novels and using an older version. Heck, even answering "I'm using the original version" will answer any player concerns.
Plus... how often is it the players that fall in love with a setting and want to play there? Isn't that almost always the DMs?
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.
Yeah... remind me to show you my Ravenloft collection sometime. I have every book published for the setting and several that weren't published.
Aldarc
Legend
I will join the chorus of mixed feelings. On the one hand, I appreciate that the Nentir Vale is getting some public recognition and not buried through any guilt by association with 4e. On the other hand, I dislike many of the proposed changes that Mike Mearls has voiced for his homebrew rendition of it, such as the Dawn War deities being prior mortals. (This even seems antithetical to the spirit of the Nentir Vale setting.) As such, I also have trepidation about the possibility of this iteration of the setting being officially published in any capacity.
Nentir Vale was a remarkable setting for 4e D&D. It cohered well with the themes, power tiers, and style of play that 4e sought to engender. I am not implying that Nentir Vale should be regarded as a idiomatic relic that should remain relegated to 4e. Eberron also represents, in many respects, a vision of D&D that makes idiomatic sense in the context of 3Era's vision of D&D (e.g., magic item creation, ubiquitous magic and magic items, etc.), but Eberron was also able to translate well enough into both 4e and 5e with expected system adjustments.
Though many regard 5e as some sort of "restoration" of DM-empowerment, I already felt empowered as a GM when running Nentir Vale back in 4e. It was a barebones, "faded-slate" setting. There was an implied setting that was clearly designed for both GM plothooks and player character plug-ins. Nearly every monster had a connection to the overarching metanarrative. There were mysteries galore! And everything had a coherent sense of place in the mythos of this implied world. Though tieflings were ex-humans, I appreciated that the two biggest empires of the past were dragonborn and tieflings rather than the usual crew (e.g., "high humans," elves, etc.). But the playable world itself was mostly bereft of cumbersome details. It was a Sandbox Heaven!
As someone who did not come into the game until the launch of 3.X, most of the prior D&D settings had already been colored in the lines. I remember thinking as I read through the 4e materials and began forming a vaguely implied picture of what would become the Nentir Vale setting, "Is this sense of wonder what it was like in the early days of Greyhawk? A mostly empty sandbox for creative play?" This setting made me want to play D&D again. By this point, I had mostly abandoned D&D proper for a number of its OGL spin-offs (e.g., True20, Arcana Evolved, etc.).
I also remember reading through the background info and thinking to myself, "Finally! A D&D setting that appreciates the cosmological motifs of real world human myths!" I loved the Dawn War mythos. It had a titanomachy with a Chaoskampf. And even 4e's refurbished alignment seemed to reflect that motif. The real world represented a miscrocosmic stage on which the macrocosmic themes were re-enacted, re-negotiated, and re-fought. The creation of the Feywild and Shadowfell as parallel planes to the Prime was a masterstroke of genius that likewise brought 4e (and the Nentir Vale) into a more mythic and folkloric frame of reference. It's little surprise that both were carried over into 5e.
Nentir Vale was a remarkable setting for 4e D&D. It cohered well with the themes, power tiers, and style of play that 4e sought to engender. I am not implying that Nentir Vale should be regarded as a idiomatic relic that should remain relegated to 4e. Eberron also represents, in many respects, a vision of D&D that makes idiomatic sense in the context of 3Era's vision of D&D (e.g., magic item creation, ubiquitous magic and magic items, etc.), but Eberron was also able to translate well enough into both 4e and 5e with expected system adjustments.
Though many regard 5e as some sort of "restoration" of DM-empowerment, I already felt empowered as a GM when running Nentir Vale back in 4e. It was a barebones, "faded-slate" setting. There was an implied setting that was clearly designed for both GM plothooks and player character plug-ins. Nearly every monster had a connection to the overarching metanarrative. There were mysteries galore! And everything had a coherent sense of place in the mythos of this implied world. Though tieflings were ex-humans, I appreciated that the two biggest empires of the past were dragonborn and tieflings rather than the usual crew (e.g., "high humans," elves, etc.). But the playable world itself was mostly bereft of cumbersome details. It was a Sandbox Heaven!
As someone who did not come into the game until the launch of 3.X, most of the prior D&D settings had already been colored in the lines. I remember thinking as I read through the 4e materials and began forming a vaguely implied picture of what would become the Nentir Vale setting, "Is this sense of wonder what it was like in the early days of Greyhawk? A mostly empty sandbox for creative play?" This setting made me want to play D&D again. By this point, I had mostly abandoned D&D proper for a number of its OGL spin-offs (e.g., True20, Arcana Evolved, etc.).
I also remember reading through the background info and thinking to myself, "Finally! A D&D setting that appreciates the cosmological motifs of real world human myths!" I loved the Dawn War mythos. It had a titanomachy with a Chaoskampf. And even 4e's refurbished alignment seemed to reflect that motif. The real world represented a miscrocosmic stage on which the macrocosmic themes were re-enacted, re-negotiated, and re-fought. The creation of the Feywild and Shadowfell as parallel planes to the Prime was a masterstroke of genius that likewise brought 4e (and the Nentir Vale) into a more mythic and folkloric frame of reference. It's little surprise that both were carried over into 5e.
doctorbadwolf
Heretic of The Seventh Circle
Jester David: why are you getting on someone’s case so hard for literally just saying they have mixed feelings about an upcoming stream?
Aside from that, a few quibbles. We do have a Ravenloft source book. It’s called Curse of Strahd. We also have a Realms source book, in SCAG.
The Eberron back catalog not selling much in spite of the Wayfinders Guide selling well is a pretty clear indication, IMO, that most people don’t take seriously the argument that we don’t need new campaign products bc the old ones are on DMsGuild (or one’s bookshelf), not that people aren’t really playing published settings. It might also indicate that people don’t feel the need for the hyper-detailed books of past editions, and are perfectly happy with books like SCAG, CoS, and WGTE.
There is literally no reason to believe that they’ll put out a Planescape book before any other book, btw. They view the core books, the entirety of 5e, as planescape books. We don’t know what order they will publish things they want to publish in, because they don’t always go by what we expect. They could put out a setting book for Mystara next year, bc they got inspired and were able to put it together within a reasonable time table, or they decided that it fit with other products for that year, or any number of other reasons.
Aside from that, a few quibbles. We do have a Ravenloft source book. It’s called Curse of Strahd. We also have a Realms source book, in SCAG.
The Eberron back catalog not selling much in spite of the Wayfinders Guide selling well is a pretty clear indication, IMO, that most people don’t take seriously the argument that we don’t need new campaign products bc the old ones are on DMsGuild (or one’s bookshelf), not that people aren’t really playing published settings. It might also indicate that people don’t feel the need for the hyper-detailed books of past editions, and are perfectly happy with books like SCAG, CoS, and WGTE.
There is literally no reason to believe that they’ll put out a Planescape book before any other book, btw. They view the core books, the entirety of 5e, as planescape books. We don’t know what order they will publish things they want to publish in, because they don’t always go by what we expect. They could put out a setting book for Mystara next year, bc they got inspired and were able to put it together within a reasonable time table, or they decided that it fit with other products for that year, or any number of other reasons.
Charlaquin
Goblin Queen (She/Her/Hers)
That’s beside the point. It doesn’t matter if it’s likely to happen or not. The fact that I’m glad that it seems so unlikely for my favorite setting to see an official 5e supplement is exactly the problem. I love Nentir Vale, and I want to get excited about the prospect of a stream set in it, to daydream about the (remote) possibility that it might get officially updated to 5e one day. But instead, I’m disinterested in the stream for it, and relieved it probably won’t get published in an official product, which again, is a terrible way to feel about one’s favorite setting.
So I don’t like that. That’s all, end of story. I’m allowed not to like it. Why is it so important to you to try to logically refute my personal, subjective opinion?
Last edited:
Satyrn
First Post
Hey. At least you keep getting XP from me for responding politely to someone trying to argue* you out having your opinion.
*Argue, browbeat, I don't really know what best describes his quixotic effort
Charlaquin
Goblin Queen (She/Her/Hers)
Haha, I think keeping calm in the midst of heated arguments is the source of a significant majority of my XP.
MonkeezOnFire
Adventurer
I didn't really start getting into D&D until the end of 4e's life cycle so I am not intimately familiar with the Nentir Vale setting but it has always been the setting that I found interesting, and I love the pantheon so much that I adopted it for my own game. One of the things that I did like about it is that the deities feel more like characters than abstract forces. They play active roles in their mythology and they behave in ways that show their flaws. So from that perspective, humanizing them further by giving them mortal origins somewhat makes sense.
I'm on the fence about the change, but I'll reserve judgement until I can see how it plays out in game. After all, that's the only thing that really matters at the end of the day.
I'm on the fence about the change, but I'll reserve judgement until I can see how it plays out in game. After all, that's the only thing that really matters at the end of the day.
Jester David
Hero
Personal failings. When someone replies to me I have to reply. It's an obsessive need.
I started asking why it matters why he was changing a setting that was designed to be changed:
http://www.enworld.org/forum/showth...geons-and-Dragons/page3&p=7526684#post7526684
And then that segued into the concerns that this will somehow hurt the setting:
http://www.enworld.org/forum/showth...geons-and-Dragons/page3&p=7526768#post7526768
Which is a pet peeve of mine. Us fans in general are always quick to shout something willl be ruined… forever!
Yeah… Curse of Strahd isn't a campaign setting. It's an update of the 1e adventure that strip mined the setting to expand the adventure into a mini-campaign, rewriting large swaths of the region. And then rewrites large chunks of the main character's backstory while also revealing one of the biggest mysteries of the world.
It's a good adventure. It's a terrible Ravenloft campaign setting product.
And yet, that didn't matter. Because I can still run the world however I want with the books I already have.
I think a big reason is that the target audience (Eberron fans) already has the books. Why buy them again?
Which is the problem. You're trying to get people to buy content they already have that many are going to consider inferiour to the original. You have to bank on large numbers of new fans making up the difference. But that doesn't always work.
Trying to talk you off the ledge and not let you make my mistakes?
Okay… Ravenloft.
Love me some Ravenloft.
Especially the later 2e books and the 3e licenced books by Swords & Sorcery.
Chris Perkins also likes Ravenloft. His first published adventure was for the setting. He recently talking about his view of the setting on the offical podcast DragonTalk and his views are polar opposites of mine. He prefers the setting to be small one-shots or mini campaigns where you get pulled into the Mists, have an adventure, possibly kill the darklord, and escape. Which is the opposite of my favourite campaign where you're born into the Land of the Mists and its the only home you know, and you have a long term campaign attempting to defend it from evil, never facing the unassailable darklords whom you may not even realize exist.
And they've updated I6 Castle Ravenloft twice in recent memory. 3e's Expedition to Castle Ravenloft and 5e's Curse of Strahd. Both of which were terrible updates. In 3e we had Strahd reimagined as the Dread Pirate Lestat and Madame Eva was a hag. (?!?) And the castle and adventure was full of all manner of aberrations and demons, mistakenly mixing Lovecraftian horror with gothic horror. And in Curse of Strahd (as I mention to doctorbadwolf) the setting was stripmined for ideas and proper nouns to expand the adventure. Madame Eva has an entirely different backstory as well, and isn't the Raunie of the Zarovan Vistani. Strahd was an evil conqueror who was always a monster, and just became a vampire, rather than tragically falling from grace. Van Richten is a cleric. (Wtf?) The church of the Morninglord was always in Barovia. The ring of choking fog no longer encircles the Village of Barovia but instead surrounds the entire province (meaning there are no other lands in the Core anymore) and Vistani potions do nothing against the fog. There’s no mention of Sturm von Zarovich, the middle child between Strahd and Sergei, and the von Zarovich lineage is dead. And Curse of Strahd presents Ireena Kolyana as being a contemporary of Van Richten, despite her living 170 years earlier. And most egregiously, the nature of the "Death" Strahd makes a pact with is revealed: it's just a vestige in some weird temple made of Amber. It reveals what the Dark Powers are, which was the biggest mystery of the setting purposely kept vague and mysterious for twenty years.
Ruined! From now on, every player introduced to the setting will only know of Barovia and not awesome locations, such as Mordent and Souragne. But given how the treated so much of the setting in Curse of Strahd, it's probably a good thing they're not doing the rest of the setting.
I used to leave sleep over this. But it wasn’t worth it. Life is just too short.
It just doesn't matter.
Does. Not. Matter.
Because new players wouldn't have known about the setting one way or another.
And it doesn't affect me since I still have my old books. And I don't play D&D with brand new players fresh out of high school. It has zero impact on my life or my campaign. And, as it turned out, the overall health and popularity of the Ravenloft setting, as very few people purchased the old books or visited the Ravenloft fan sites I'm a part of.
Telling fans of the “new” Ravenloft that they're doing it wrong and they like a bastardized version of the setting would just be pure gatekeeping.
Instead, I should just be happy they’re enjoying something simmilar to what I enjoy.
doctorbadwolf
Heretic of The Seventh Circle
OK, I get that, I suppose.
But that's the thing. It is the 5e Ravenloft source book. Some of us prefer it, some of us hate the changes, some in between (I prefer some changes, but find Strahd less interesting in this version), but it is a Ravenloft campaign setting source, regardless. And for Ravenloft fans who do play with new players, it sucks that those new players will expect CoS when they get a chance to play a Ravenloft game.
Yes, you can just use your old books. Sure. That doesn't make it magically not suck that the whole setting got overhauled in a way that fundamentally changed what it is. (although some old schoolers prefer the new one bc they feel it's more true to the OG adventure, and consider the old setting books as a departure, for what it's worth).
Just like if they put out a Dragonlance adventure that has the twins die heroically in the War of The Lance, it would suck tremendously for people who want to run post-War/Legends era DL games, using the old lore, because any new group they could find would have strong attachments to the new canon, or wouldn't really care but would still be confused by the different canon.
I don't think it's unreasonable to say that if they are going to put out story or game products (and yeah, a stream game is a story product, just like a book or cartoon) that use a setting, it shouldn't change the basic nature of the setting.
Which is why they probably won't put out whole lines of new setting books, unless it's for a brand new setting, or one that almost no one will have books for, like Mystara. Eberron has been supported well in the last two editions, so it's genuinely fair to expect that most existing fans for it will have the old books, and to recognize that it's always mostly been the primary setting books that actually sold well.
OTOH, there are millions of new players, and people still actually prefer print books, and most newer gamers I've met don't know that drivethrurpg exists, much less that they can get out of print game books printed on demand there.
If you'll accept some constructive criticism, perhaps frame your response to someone doing what you once did as you have here, rather than how you did at the start of this argument with Charlequin.
They aren't wrong, they're just doing something that you've found to not be worth the stress. Those are two different things, and should be responded to differently, right?
