D&D 5E Will 5e D&D re-claim its campaign settings.

[Azurewraith]

I think seeing new materials from the older settings with the art direction of 5e would be really cool. But not if they can't really afford to do it in their business model.

As long as they fix those bobble heads urn, I mean halflings.

As for settings I can see the majorily different settings getting an update so darksun,eberron and ravenloft I can't think of anymore of the top of my head. We really don't need to see generic high fantasy setting number 61 which varies from 60 by making dwarves lose darkvision due to them living in a giant tree.

 

[PatriotofKarrnath]

I wont touch another 5th ed book without an eberron setting. I dislike "premade" modules greatly, and it seems that all thats coming out are these campaign sets. I do not doubt that they are pretty good, but since I have no use for them, I cant justify the high cost for something I wont use. Now an eberron setting would get my money whether or not I used it for 5th. I gather from DL Nexus WoTC is unwilling to open itself up to internal competition in settings. From what I got reading posts there, WotC is not willing to let Dragonlance return becuase it could hurt FR sales. I dont think my beloved eberron would affect those in any way, we are somewhat strange ducks in our own.

 

[ZeshinX]

I wouldn't expect anything more from WotC than a passing nod or name-drop at some of them (as they have done). If/when some are actually used, it will be in the form of their storyline concept. Much like Ravenloft.

I suspect they'll only directly use a setting if there exists a more general interest in the features of the setting. Ravenloft would be a natural draw for fans of things like Supernatural, Twilight, Lucifer, etc, etc (no matter how far removed those things might be from traditional gothic horror). It's enough to grab interest to make a sale.

Frankly I despise their storylines, so aside from the PHB, DMG and MM, I haven't spent a cent on D&D (skipped SCL since that wasn't even D&D...and the studio borked that game so hard it just killed them, the novels have been crap for years, and DM's Guild is mostly house rules of fanfic quality).

I want to spend some money on D&D, but there's still nothing worth spending money on.

 

[RotGrub]

Frankly I despise their storylines, so aside from the PHB, DMG and MM, I haven't spent a cent on D&D (skipped SCL since that wasn't even D&D...and the studio borked that game so hard it just killed them, the novels have been crap for years, and DM's Guild is mostly house rules of fanfic quality).

I want to spend some money on D&D, but there's still nothing worth spending money on.

I'm in the exact same situation, but I guess we are part of such a small minority that our money doesn't count.

 

[RotGrub]

I wont touch another 5th ed book without an eberron setting. I dislike "premade" modules greatly, and it seems that all thats coming out are these campaign sets. I do not doubt that they are pretty good, but since I have no use for them, I cant justify the high cost for something I wont use. Now an eberron setting would get my money whether or not I used it for 5th. I gather from DL Nexus WoTC is unwilling to open itself up to internal competition in settings. From what I got reading posts there, WotC is not willing to let Dragonlance return becuase it could hurt FR sales. I dont think my beloved eberron would affect those in any way, we are somewhat strange ducks in our own.

I'm also not a fan of pre-made modules. I do like dungeon magazine size adventures, but for the most part I run my own story lines within official campaign settings.

I think WoTC needs to take a more balanced approach.

 

[ZeshinX]

I'm in the exact same situation, but I guess we are part of such a small minority that our money doesn't count.

It counts, but minimally at this point. WotC I suspect is still riding this notion that licensing the brand instead of creating content will be the way of the future for D&D. They haven't themselves produced a single piece of salable content outside the Core Books (everything else has been farmed out to 3rd parties). So, WotC is more concerned with selling the concept of D&D rather than any specific products, because that'll make it more appealing to those wanting to use the license.

Of course, Sword Coast Legends was a cluster frak of a disaster....so I'm sure D&D is going to have a hard time on the video game side of things (which is a market just swimming in money). Beamdog might salvage things a little with Siege of Dragonspear.

 

[RotGrub]

It counts, but minimally at this point. WotC I suspect is still riding this notion that licensing the brand instead of creating content will be the way of the future for D&D. They haven't themselves produced a single piece of salable content outside the Core Books (everything else has been farmed out to 3rd parties). So, WotC is more concerned with selling the concept of D&D rather than any specific products, because that'll make it more appealing to those wanting to use the license.

Of course, Sword Coast Legends was a cluster frak of a disaster....so I'm sure D&D is going to have a hard time on the video game side of things (which is a market just swimming in money). Beamdog might salvage things a little with Siege of Dragonspear.

I do recall reading that WotC's licensing approach was one of the primary reasons Monte Cook quit the 5e development team.

I just hope all the sales of 5e prompts them to change their business model a bit. I'm not interested in these huge epic story based modules at all.

 

[hawkeyefan]

I've purchased almost all the published products for 5E, with the exception of Rise of Tiamat. So far, I've used stuff from every single book. I have not run any of the adventures as described in the books. There are so many sections that can be pulled from the larger adventure path and treated as a small unconnected adventure with little to no modification. Then there are even more that will require a bit of modification.

As I said above, I'd likely buy some setting books if they put them out, because I can always steal and repurpose content even with a setting I don't plan on using.

For those of you who don't do that...what do you want for the settings? What do you need for a Dragonlance game that the Tyranny of Dragons books don't provide?

Or perhaps a better question would be what do you need for Ebberon? I'm much less familiar with that setting, so what is it you guys need WotC to produce in order for you to play Ebberon based games?

 

[ZeshinX]

I've purchased almost all the published products for 5E, with the exception of Rise of Tiamat. So far, I've used stuff from every single book. I have not run any of the adventures as described in the books. There are so many sections that can be pulled from the larger adventure path and treated as a small unconnected adventure with little to no modification. Then there are even more that will require a bit of modification.

Therein lies the disconnect for me. Not that I don't see the value you derive from it, that much is plain and good. For me, the cost of the books don't justify the bits and pieces. I won't spend $50+ for a tiny sliver of useful content. The bits and pieces I find useful are the character options. That's about it. The adventures or pieces thereof are of no use to me, as I create my own.

For those with far more limited time but still want to create their own adventures/worlds, then what you suggest is quite an excellent way to go about it and by no means do I disparage those who do it and enjoy it.

 

[RotGrub]

For those of you who don't do that...what do you want for the settings? What do you need for a Dragonlance game that the Tyranny of Dragons books don't provide?

New Maps, Ansalon and Taladas Races, Sub classes (Wizards of HS, Solamnic Knights, Dragon Knights), Moon Magic, Spells, Krynn Monsters, Unique equipment, History/Timeline updates, etc