D&D 5E Should WotC launch a new Living Campaign with D&D Next?

[Plaguescarred]

I hope WoTC launch a new Living Campaign with D&D Next.

Living Eberron or Living Dragonlance would be AWESOME !!

 

[aurdraco]

Good post, OP! I'm glad that you enjoyed my book.

I think that if the RIGHT person at WOTC were in charge of a Living Campaign, regardless of edition used, it could do well as long as that person had really learned valuable lessons from Living City, LG, LFR, PFS, and even obscure campaigns like Living Death. Problem is, even those of us who were Triad or Circle members during Living Greyhawk, and, I imagine, LFR admins (I'd have to ask my old buddy Konrad), probably can't agree on what makes a Living Campaign work (the rift between the European and American styles is, imo, especially significant). However, that being said, I still think WOTC should try it. If one were to take the best aspects of Living City, LG, and PFS, I think one would end up with a really great, and significant campaign.

Good gaming!

aurdraco
aka Casey
BK Triad 2005-2008

 

[DMSamuel]

I think to make it work WotC would have to be willing to make significant changes to the old living campaigns model. Frankly, I don't see that happening. I think they will continue to use Forgotten Realms as the canon-cash-cow they always have and then run seasonal encounters. It is a better business decision for them and one that the marketing and business development departments will get behind. I don't think the return on investment of a living campaign is high enough for them, especially when encounters is going so strongly.

 

[Stormonu]

Personally, I dislike living games for what they do to campaigns. I have no interest in trying to keep up with a campaign world that is a moving target not under my or my players control. I also have a very strong dislike of RPGA/Living games from some bad experiences, and I just don't like the play style I've seen develop in the ones I've played in. It's very different from that of a home game, and I'd rather not see the "tournament" scene drive products that are put out.

I do hope, however, that Wotc will try to make a new campaign world.

 

[DMSamuel]

I do hope, however, that Wotc will try to make a new campaign world.

Now there's an idea I can fully get behind!

 

[Pour]

Now there's an idea I can fully get behind!

Seconded!

 

[Lord Mhoram]

I'd like to see no real organized play or living world, with one caveat. Next is all about making the game your own. Each table at organized play uses the house GM's modules and structure - or they rotated Basic one week, Standard next, and advanced after. Tactical rules module every 2nd standard or advanced. Not every week.

Basically I do not want to see rules that are codified for organized play that become "The standard rules" and influence opinion at the table of what Next is supposed to be. I want to see every table run it their way and every table just a little bit different. A standard set of options/rules in an organized play situation could reign in that freedom. To me that variance, that chaos if you will, is one the things I love most about the concept of Next.

 

[Grimmjow]

Seconded!

third! just as long as we get the old ones too!

 

[DerekSTheRed]

I think to make it work WotC would have to be willing to make significant changes to the old living campaigns model. Frankly, I don't see that happening. I think they will continue to use Forgotten Realms as the canon-cash-cow they always have and then run seasonal encounters. It is a better business decision for them and one that the marketing and business development departments will get behind. I don't think the return on investment of a living campaign is high enough for them, especially when encounters is going so strongly.

This logic is what I fear WotC is thinking right now. My only counter would be to look at Pathfinder Society. Their Living Campaign is a mostly free enterprise that generates interest in their products. Increased interest means increased revenue albeit indirectly. It's a small investment that can generate a return and I don't see a downside to trying it out. If it fails, they can turn it over to the volunteers like they did with LFR.

 

[DerekSTheRed]

I'd like to see no real organized play or living world, with one caveat. Next is all about making the game your own. Each table at organized play uses the house GM's modules and structure - or they rotated Basic one week, Standard next, and advanced after. Tactical rules module every 2nd standard or advanced. Not every week.

Basically I do not want to see rules that are codified for organized play that become "The standard rules" and influence opinion at the table of what Next is supposed to be. I want to see every table run it their way and every table just a little bit different. A standard set of options/rules in an organized play situation could reign in that freedom. To me that variance, that chaos if you will, is one the things I love most about the concept of Next.

Encounters will set a standard set of rules whether there is a Living Campaign or not. Might as well add a new Living Campaign to add to the chaos.