The New D&D Adventure Storyline Will Be Announced On June 2nd-3rd

WotC is holding an event, which they're calling the Stream of Annihilation, on June 2nd and 3rd to announce the new D&D storyline. Various D&D Twitch steamers have been invited to participate in the upcoming campaign, which will be live streamed along with interviews, and so on. "We’ll have folks from Misscliks, Maze Arcana, Critical Role, and Dice, Camera, Action! with Chris Perkins, not to mention international gaming groups like Yogscast's HighRollers (U.K.) and Dragon Friends (Australia)." You'll be able to watch it all live on Twitch at the time. Is this where we'll discover the identity of the mysterious Dust and Midway? Speculate away!

​

Here's the announcement in full. There's more info about the hosts and the guests here.

Dungeons & Dragons loves the amazing video streams produced by our fans. This community-generated live-play highlights what’s fantastic about D&D—sitting down together with your friends to tell a grand story!


To celebrate, we’ve invited a bunch of D&D streamers and luminaries to Seattle, Washington to hang out and roll some dice on June 2nd and 3rd! This two-day event is called the Stream of Annihilation and it’s two full days of streaming that D&D fans won’t want to miss. We’ll have folks from Misscliks, Maze Arcana, Critical Role, and Dice, Camera, Action! with Chris Perkins, not to mention international gaming groups like Yogscast's HighRollers (U.K.) and Dragon Friends (Australia).
[h=3]PROGRAMMING[/h]Kicking off at 10am on both June 2nd and 3rd, hosts Anna Prosser Robinson and Kelly Link will talk to the Wizards of the Coast D&D team and learn all about our next exciting storyline coming in September. Then each group of streamers will play or share a sample of what to expect from the campaigns they’ll be running over the summer that preview the new D&D story. There will be multiple live games, interviews, new product unveils and improvised hilarity each day, starting at 10am PT and ending at 10pm each night. You’ll get introduced to the High Rollers crew delving into uncharted territory DMed by Mark Hulmes, a new Misscliks show investigating rumors called Risen, two weekly groups from our friends Satine Phoenix and Ruty Rutenberg at Maze Arcana, a new group of L.A. actors called Girls Guts Glory, and more!


Throughout the Stream of Annihilation, we’ll drop details on our expanded D&D Twitch programming, new accessories fans have been clamoring for coming later this year, and amazing board games and products from our partners. You’ll hear from Cryptic Studios about plans for Neverwinter, Curse Media for D&D Beyond, as well as WizKids, Gale Force 9, Fantasy Grounds, Roll20, and more. Plus, like any Dungeon Master worth their salt, we have a few exciting surprises to pull from our bags of holding!
[h=3]FURTHER DETAILS[/h]You’ll have to watch the Stream of Annihilation to catch it all live! Follow twitch.tv/DnD to get all the updates, then mark your calendars for Friday, June 2nd and Saturday, June 3rd to make sure you don’t miss a thing!


A full schedule, group bios and some more of the celebrities attending the Stream of Annihilation will be announced over the next few weeks. We’ll also be talking about the event on our official Twitter account (@Wizards_DnD) as well as interviewing some of the groups this month on Dragon Talk, the official D&D podcast.

SaveSave​

 

[Jester David]

One of the example settings you gave was Westeros which, in my opinion, is a terrible DnD setting. I mean sure not as horrible as Middle Earth but otherwise just a really really bad fit for DnD especially compared to any other DnD setting.

It was an example. Lots of people opt to run in literary settings, irregardless if they're a "bad fit for D&D" or not, as the intent is to run the setting first and not D&D, which is just being used as a generic RPG ruleset (four better or worse).

So why should WotC do the heavy lifting? Well for a start they own the settings and those settings are specifically designed for DnD even the bad settings like Dark Sun.

So? WotC owns lots of things, both D&D and other settings.
No other company can publish Dreamblade or Heroscape, but they're not obligated to release those.

For a second, another company selling settings will not do anything to solve the WotC "no one buys anything except Forgotten Realms" issue. All of their data will still indicate that fact.

Y'know, except that only 38% *play* in the Realms, and that's skewed heavily by the published adventurers. Not everyone who plays the adventures would buy a campaign setting or have any interest in the Realms for homebrew games.
It's really not "no one buys anything except Forgotten Realms" but closer to "no one buys anything, but Forgotten Realms sells the least bad". Or "... but Forgotten Realms doesn't lose money."

And for a third, many of those other settings that are available are just incredibly niche products that probably would not even show up on the "What setting do you play" questionnaires. I mean take arguably the second most popular DnD setting of Golarion - it does not even show up on the Sly Flourish questionnaire and it gets amazing levels of support.

I imagine Golarion would be covered by the 300-odd people who chose "non-D&D setting". Which is roughly the same number as "non-FR D&D settings". So, really, Golarion could very easily be the second most popular setting in fantasy RPGs, since that 300 is drawing from a smaller pool.
Campaign settings will always be a niche product, regardless of publisher.
Golarion sells well for Paizo (most of the time), but Pathfinder sells a fraction of the number of books as D&D. A bestseller for Paizo is barely worth printing for WotC.

So that is why WotC needs to do the heavy lifting but you are correct that they are not capable of doing it as it is a "losing strategy".

I wouldn't say "not capable". Instead i would say that it's "more efficient digging a big hole, filling it with money, and lighting it on fire".

Again, with Golarion potentially being as popular as Dragonlance or Eberron, then WotC really doesn't need to do the heavy lifting. Paizo and Kobold Press and Green Ronin can reach just as many fans and sell almost as many copies as WotC. Simply because the audience for that material is so small.

 

[bmfrosty]

One of the example settings you gave was Westeros which, in my opinion, is a terrible DnD setting. I mean sure not as horrible as Middle Earth but otherwise just a really really bad fit for DnD especially compared to any other DnD setting.

So why should WotC do the heavy lifting? Well for a start they own the settings and those settings are specifically designed for DnD even the bad settings like Dark Sun. For a second, another company selling settings will not do anything to solve the WotC "no one buys anything except Forgotten Realms" issue. All of their data will still indicate that fact. And for a third, many of those other settings that are available are just incredibly niche products that probably would not even show up on the "What setting do you play" questionnaires. I mean take arguably the second most popular DnD setting of Golarion - it does not even show up on the Sly Flourish questionnaire and it gets amazing levels of support.

So that is why WotC needs to do the heavy lifting but you are correct that they are not capable of doing it as it is a "losing strategy".

What if they gave Goodman a license to make a FRCG and a Ravenloft CG?

Then after Dust comes out a Dark Sun CG?

Then after an Eberron AP comes out an Eberron CG?

 

[doctorbadwolf]

While I don't take sly flourish's poll too seriously, and I think it's numbers would shift dramatically if there were decent 5e support for the mechanical options of the main 5 or so settings, the best bet for settings, which Mearls has all but stated explicitly will be supported in some way more than they have been so far, would be a Guide To The Multi-Verse, which would be a phb sized book with the mechanical options needed to run, and some decent amount of setting info on, at least;

Greyhawk (but only because Mearls loves it for some unfathomable reason)
Eberron (consistently the second most popular setting in every poll I've ever seen in the last 6-7 years, and Mearls' 2nd favorite)
Dragonlance (provides a lot of goodies for any campaign, needs a canon update, big novel fanbase, would make an excellent movie trilogy)
Planescape or Spelljammer, but not both

If there is room, cover Dark Sun, maybe give a few pages on Mystara.

I don't see any value in updating greyhawk, personally, but if it has to be there, fine. I'd rather it be DL, Eberron, and DS or SJ, and then lots of advice and guidelines and such for building worlds, though.

 

[Jester David]

While I don't take sly flourish's poll too seriously,

I think it's the best poll we're likely to get. 6000 respondents is a lot. Shea is pretty well known, and will attract a lot of respondents, plus it drew from here, Reddit, Twitter, Facebook. And it was retweeted by Geek & Sundry and Matt Mercer getting it a LOT of attention. So there was a solid mix of old and new players from across the internet.
It's not going to attract the casuals or aged grognards, who don't engage with D&D online, but I doubt anyone short of WotC will do better.

So, I feel comfortable using those numbers as a pretty representative sampling. A good cross-section of the community.

and I think it's numbers would shift dramatically if there were decent 5e support for the mechanical options of the main 5 or so settings, the best bet for settings,

I highly doubt it.

The number playing in the Realms is artificially increased by the storylines and Adventurer's League. That's not going to change. (Even then, they're *really* playing the storylines and AL and not really choosing to play in the Realms. The Realms is incidental.)

I think the numbers would shift a little, but not a dramatic shift. 5e is pretty hackable, so the people who want to play in a setting will likely do so, making up a few races or moon magic isn't much of a barrier to entry. Especially as, by definition, fans of the old 2e settings will be more experienced gamers. No Dragonlance fan is going to look at 5e and say "man, I really want to play me some DL, but there are no rules for Moon Magic. Guess I'll just stick with the Realms."

Most people are playing homebrew, which is a hell of a lot more work than designing a couple new races. They're doing it by choice.

Honestly, I think a lot more people are fans of a settings as a concept but not something they actually use at the table. They like reading the settings, but are less likely to actually run them. It's a source of ideas and inspiration, but they also have their homebrew world to play in.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

[MENTION=37579]Jester David[/MENTION] I think I need to clarify, because I clearly didn't communicate well. I mean, you also ignored the actual meat of the post to quibble over an aside, which I've little respect for, so there's that.

Still, clarification. I won't get into a breakdown of the value of twitter polls, so I'll just be dealing with the second part you quoted.
The numbers would change, for a few reasons.
1, because people who play in the published APs and then branch off from there are all playing in FR.

2, there are no adventures or books out for 5e in other settings, which means only older edition fans have been exposed to those settings!

3, a LOT of people don't want to create a bunch of homebrew to play the game. IME, most DMs would rather wait to use an option than make their own version of it, unless it's a really simple thing. Houserules at some thing, homebrew is another.


It is genuinely ridiculous to think that the setting in which every 5e book is based wouldn't automatically be noticably more commonly played than settings which have, at most, sidebars explaining how elves act in that setting.

The idea that older ed DMs are the ones that would want to run games in older editions misses all of the points, completely. How can we even know that, if other settings haven't been supported in 5e? I've met new players that didn't even know there were whole other settings. They thought the worlds mentioned in the books were just flavorful examples of how to use options in your own home made world! Others have no clue how to even get ahold of stuff from older editions, much less even begin to try and convert stuff!

I've shared my own homebrew stuff with a half dozen or so DMs I know via game store and online so they could run Eberron, after reading the Eberron UA, and googling it. All but two of them were going to just keep playing in FR until/unless wotc put our stuff for Eberron, one was considering just banning anything that couldnt be relfavored versions of existing stuff, and one was willing to homebrew, but had never done so before, and didnt want to break her game with unbalanced races and feats and items (and was stoked to not have to do all that work, because what I gave her represents at least a full work week worth of work).

The idea that a "who is playing what?" Poll will tell us what people care about, when only 1 options has official material for it, is just silly.

 

[Jester David]

[MENTION=37579]Jester David[/MENTION] I think I need to clarify, because I clearly didn't communicate well. I mean, you also ignored the actual meat of the post to quibble over an aside, which I've little respect for, so there's that.

I just had nothing to add to the idea of a Guide to the Multiverse. I think the idea of a splatbook that doesn't give generic options but instead provides all the crunch & rules needed for multiple past settings is a good idea - I've pitched it here myself a few times.
I doubt it'd describe the settings in any real detail. Because space would be at a premium.

[MENTION=37579]1, because people who play in the published APs and then branch off from there are all playing in FR.

Yes. I agree completely. They're more-or-less playing in the Realms. That doesn't mean they'd buy a FR book or play a homebrew campaign in the Realms. It doesn't mean they're FR fans. It just means they're playing the published adventures which just happen to be in the Realms but could just as easily be in a randomly generated world.

[MENTION=37579]2, there are no adventures or books out for 5e in other settings, which means only older edition fans have been exposed to those settings!

True as well (ignoring PDFs).

[MENTION=37579]3, a LOT of people don't want to create a bunch of homebrew to play the game. IME, most DMs would rather wait to use an option than make their own version of it, unless it's a really simple thing. Houserules at some thing, homebrew is another.

I'd disagree with that. Ardently.
Looking at the DMsGuild and the D&D Facebook page and the UA Reddit there is a strong, strong desire among DMs to homebrew and create their own material.
You don't become a DM if you're not creative, and house rules and homebrew are a strong part of that.

[MENTION=37579]The idea that older ed DMs are the ones that would want to run games in older editions misses all of the points, completely. How can we even know that, if other settings haven't been supported in 5e? I've met new players that didn't even know there were whole other settings. They thought the worlds mentioned in the books were just flavorful examples of how to use options in your own home made world! Others have no clue how to even get ahold of stuff from older editions, much less even begin to try and convert stuff!

I absolutely agree that if WotC released an Eberron or Dragonlance or Dark Sun campaign setting then new player *might* be interested in that product.

The problem is how many. What ratio?
The catch is it's an unknown. A potential audience. They might like it, but then again, they might not. They might be happy with their own world, as D&D players historically have been. Or they might just continue to play the adventures and use whatever setting those are in.

It's not like the number of D&D players had suddenly tripled. There's a hell of a lot of new players, but the majority of D&D players probably have some experience with the game dating back a decade or two. The majority of players know the settings.

 

[guachi]

I don't think your point counters his in any way. He's only suggesting that a one-world focus is unimaginative, which is a fair point.

The rest of it is still pretty imaginative. IMO, 'natch.

Sent from my LG-D852 using EN World mobile app

Oh, I love the rules. I was out of D&D for a long time and was looking around to see what was out there online and, by pure coincidence, I started reading this forum and another forum just before 5e Basic Rules came out.

I loved what I read. After I was able to process the changes, that is. i bought lots of old modules either at dndclassics.com or ebay I never had the money for. Bought other accessories from 3rd parties. But the WotC APs leave me cold.

 

[rooneg]

It's not like the number of D&D players had suddenly tripled. There's a hell of a lot of new players, but the majority of D&D players probably have some experience with the game dating back a decade or two. The majority of players know the settings.

This is part of why WotC is so heavy on the retro stuff in their new HCs. It's also why 5e feels a lot like older editions, even if there are some sacred cows they could slay in order to make the game better in the abstract, if it moves too far from the old stuff then people coming back to the game don't feel at home.

 

[Shasarak]

What if they gave Goodman a license to make a FRCG and a Ravenloft CG?

Then after Dust comes out a Dark Sun CG?

Then after an Eberron AP comes out an Eberron CG?

Yes, what if that happens? Will Forgotten Realms still be the "least worst selling" campaign setting (as Jester puts it)?

Or will Goodman have achieved something categorically worse then digging a hole, filling it with money and then burning it?

 

[Mercule]

Y'know, except that only 38% *play* in the Realms, and that's skewed heavily by the published adventurers.

1, because people who play in the published APs and then branch off from there are all playing in FR.
...
The idea that a "who is playing what?" Poll will tell us what people care about, when only 1 options has official material for it, is just silly.

The above is all part of why I'm so vocal about not liking the Realms. When every published adventure defaults to at least starting in the Realms and the Realms is the only setting with anything approaching formal support (SCAG), not even 2 in 5 actually play in the Realms. That could mean any of three things:

1) There just isn't a market for published adventures, regardless of what setting they're in. If this is the case, then why bother with any setting, at all? Just throw them into some random, undefined march, like was often done in 1E.

2) There's a market for the adventures, but enough folks find the Realms unacceptable that they're willing to customize them to use elsewhere. Having attempted conversion of a couple of the adventures (PotA successfully, HotDQ, not so much), this is not a trivial undertaking and don't let anyone convince you otherwise. It's not necessarily an ordeal, but it's still a pretty strong statement.

3) The market for published settings is pretty small and it doesn't so much matter which setting as it does how much official support there is for it. WotC could just as easily have made Greyhawk the default setting for 5E and the published adventures would have sold just as well. The Realms is sort of the Kim Kardashian of D&D worlds: it's the most played because it's the most played.

Personally, I think it's a mix of all the above. Of the 38%, I wouldn't be at all surprised to see it broken into three roughly even groups:

1) A subset who genuinely enjoy the specific character of the Realms. They're explicitly interested in the Realms being maintained and supported. Most of them are probably ticked that there isn't a 5E FRCS, yet. A significant number, maybe even a majority, would jump all over combined rules/setting core books where the Realms wasn't a side bar in the PHB, but called out throughout.

2) A portion that likes lore but isn't particularly attached to the Realms. Not every setting (e.g. Spelljammer, Dark Sun) would be able to float their boat, but they'd be just as happy with Greyhawk, Krynn, Mystarra, or even Eberron as the default/AL setting.

3) A group that's not particularly thrilled by using the Realms, but values some aspect of the "officialness" of it all. Maybe they just want published adventures and don't care at all what setting it is. Maybe it's something else. They might prefer to jump, but not without some promise of official 5E content.

Groups #2 and #3 are pretty firmly in either the "Kardashian" camp or are just completionists. They aren't really even worth considering in terms of which setting to publish. They'll probably buy whatever is produced. If they don't care for, say, Eberron, there's probably an alternate buyer waiting to fill the gap.

The real question, in my mind, is how much of the first group would switch loyalties to another setting vs. how many fans of other settings would step in to fill the gap. If, say, half of group #1 would switch (grudgingly or otherwise) to Eberron (just to be consistent with my example), then that means that the size of the dedicated, "from my cold, dead heads" fanbase for the Realms is roughly the same as for any other setting -- somewhere under 5% of the total player base.

The idea that the default setting has little-to-no impact on the overall success of the D&D game just smells right. I say the Realms has had a few good years as the preeminent D&D setting. Give the crown to another one for another 2-3 years.

What if they gave Goodman a license to make a FRCG and a Ravenloft CG?

Of all the alternate settings, if none see real first-party support, my hope is that they somehow open up Eberron so that Keith Baker can do more work on it. That could be DMs Guild, another license (Goodman, etc.), or whatever. Keith has been participating in an Eberron podcast for the past few months and clearly still has a love for the setting.