D&D 5E WotC to increase releases per year?

[Parmandur]

tying into my earlier post: 9 months from the Ravenloft Subclass UA test to publication, and 4 months from the Ravenloft Lineage UA test to publication in May. 9 months from the Draconic Subclasses UA test is July, and 4 months from today's Fey Lineage test is also July.

Maybe coincidence, maybe they are for the same book.

In other news, Strixhaven is the upcoming Magic: the Gathering Set, which is set in a Magic University (nothign like Hogwarts, perish the thought) that has five Houses each founded by an Elder Dragon, and has Owl people and some other Fey things going on. This may also be a coincidence.

 

[Urriak Uruk]

tying into my earlier post: 9 months from the Ravenloft Subclass UA test to publication, and 4 months from the Ravenloft Lineage UA test to publication in May. 9 months from the Draconic Subclasses UA test is July, and 4 months from today's Fey Lineage test is also July.

Maybe coincidence, maybe they are for the same book.

In other news, Strixhaven is the upcoming Magic: the Gathering Set, which is set in a Magic University (nothign like Hogwarts, perish the thought) that has five Houses each founded by an Elder Dragon, and has Owl people and some other Fey things going on. This may also be a coincidence.

I was personally wondering if a Dragon-Themed book was too limited in scope in material, so adding Feywild-material could get it to a Volo-size. Some of the monster books don't really have much of a cohesive theme, like Mordenkainen's (Fiends, Drow, Duergar, Gith?). So maybe the monster book is Dragons and the Feywild.

Other option is that this is for the annual adventure book, which could be in the Feywild, but they are also giving more player's options. This would be more than they typically do, but it would make some sense.

Last option is for a setting... I personally am very skeptical of Strixhaven, as I find it unlikely that WotC would risk publishing an entirely new setting for MtG, and then risk making an entirely new book for it in D&D so soon after. Eldraine would make a little more sense (its a little older now and I think well recieved), but I still doubt that too. I don't think these fit well into a setting book, unless it's Planescape which should have much more material from other planes.

So... I really have no idea where this is going to be!

 

[Parmandur]

I was personally wondering if a Dragon-Themed book was too limited in scope in material, so adding Feywild-material could get it to a Volo-size. Some of the monster books don't really have much of a cohesive theme, like Mordenkainen's (Fiends, Drow, Duergar, Gith?). So maybe the monster book is Dragons and the Feywild.

Other option is that this is for the annual adventure book, which could be in the Feywild, but they are also giving more player's options. This would be more than they typically do, but it would make some sense.

Last option is for a setting... I personally am very skeptical of Strixhaven, as I find it unlikely that WotC would risk publishing an entirely new setting for MtG, and then risk making an entirely new book for it in D&D so soon after. Eldraine would make a little more sense (its a little older now and I think well recieved), but I still doubt that too. I don't think these fit well into a setting book, unless it's Planescape which should have much more material from other planes.

So... I really have no idea where this is going to be!

A Feywild Adventure in September is a pretty solid possibility, and there is precedent for Lineage options in the Adventure books (Princes of the Apocalypse, Time of the Frost maiden).

The coincidence of the Elder Dragons and specifically owl people in Strixhaven gives me pause, though, even though you are right in that feels overly bold for WotC typical IP approach. There is a new Sheriff in town, on the other hand, and Winninger seems big on Settings

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Last option is for a setting... I personally am very skeptical of Strixhaven, as I find it unlikely that WotC would risk publishing an entirely new setting for MtG, and then risk making an entirely new book for it in D&D so soon after.

I dunno... to me, that sounds exactly like the type of cross-platform marketing that modern big IP-holders love to do, for good or ill.

 

[Urriak Uruk]

I dunno... to me, that sounds exactly like the type of cross-platform marketing that modern big IP-holders love to do, for good or ill.

I'll add that the connection of Strixhaven to this UA seems very strenuous... yes they have Owlfolk, but they don't have rabbitfolk, fairies or hobgoblins (from what I've seen). Plus, the card set is very much focused on this school, rather than anything else. It would be extremely limited in scope, with a tenuous connection to the Feywild.

I've noticed folks here suggest ties to MtG sets every time a new UA is released to coincide with MtG releases, including for Zendikar, Innistrad, and now Strixhaven. Of the three, Strixhaven seems the least likely of the speculation I've heard.

 

[Parmandur]

I'll add that the connection of Strixhaven to this UA seems very strenuous... yes they have Owlfolk, but they don't have rabbitfolk, fairies or hobgoblins (from what I've seen). Plus, the card set is very much focused on this school, rather than anything else. It would be extremely limited in scope, with a tenuous connection to the Feywild.

I've noticed folks here suggest ties to MtG sets every time a new UA is released to coincide with MtG releases, including for Zendikar, Innistrad, and now Strixhaven. Of the three, Strixhaven seems the least likely of the speculation I've heard.

I'll admit it is tenuous, and quite possibly wrong: but a Strixhaven Setting book is the most plausible hypothesis for a book that would combine the decidedly odd Draconic Monk and Ranger Subclasses with the equally odd Fay Lineages, which do seem to be connected. No Monster book has had Subclasses, and the only books other than the PHB/DMG that have both Subclasses and Lineages are Setting books. The flavor for both UA is...odd...and they do seem to be for the same product, based on timing.

One way or another, whatever this is seems to be a break from precedent...another WotC specialty.

 

[Parmandur]

I dunno... to me, that sounds exactly like the type of cross-platform marketing that modern big IP-holders love to do, for good or ill.

@Urriak Uruk is right that it would be a novel direction for WOtC to develop a Setting for both games simultaneously...but...that would be a natural move in many ways.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

I've noticed folks here suggest ties to MtG sets every time a new UA is released to coincide with MtG releases, including for Zendikar, Innistrad, and now Strixhaven. Of the three, Strixhaven seems the least likely of the speculation I've heard.

Absolutely. I think the "Think Magic First" attitude has come from the overall desire for something like Planescape, only to be let down (twice now!) by the reveal of yet-another-Magic book. Or maybe that's just me? (I doubt it). Still, I've been pleasantly surprised by the Magic settings so far (I wouldn't have thought that I'd have any interest at all in them, and they've been pretty okay so far). I'd welcome Kamigawa in place of Kara Tur at this point, and I'd be fine if the Dragon book was Tarkir. I can play magic well enough, but I've never paid attention to the lore until now (now that they've crossed it into D&D, where the lore actually means something to me!)

I doubt that this stuff is for Strixhaven (more likely a younger-skewing feywild setting, which I think would be great - I've got a lot of parents trying to teach their kids D&D that I could sell that too!) but it wouldn't surprise me either, if some suit got it in their head that they need "synergy"...

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

Is there a famous faerie dragon?

It could be the narrator in ''X guide to Y monsters''

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Rumplebee's Guide to the Feywild!

(I just made up Rumplebee... I don't know any D&D cuteness. My first thought with the rabitfolk was to make a flea-bitten assassin with a scarred eye and a mangled ear and play him not-cute-at-all.)