D&D 5E WotC: 5 D&D Settings In Development?

WotC's Ray Winninger spoke a little about some upcoming D&D settings -- two classic settings are coming in 2022 in formats we haven't seen before, and two brand new (not Magic: the Gathering) settings are also in development, as well as return to a setting they've already covered in 5E. He does note, however, that of the last three, there's a chance of one or more not making it to release, as they develop more than they use.

Two classic settings? What could they be?​

So that's:

• 2 classic settings in 2022 (in a brand new format)
• 2 brand new settings
• 1 returning setting

So the big questions -- what are the two classic settings, and what do they mean by a format we haven't seen before? Winninger has clarified on Twitter that "Each of these products is pursuing a different format you've never seen before. And neither is "digital only;" these are new print formats."

As I've mentioned on a couple of occasions, there are two more products that revive "classic" settings in production right now.

The manuscript for the first, overseen by [Chris Perkins], is nearly complete. Work on the second, led by [F. Wesley Schneider] with an assist from [Ari Levitch], is just ramping up in earnest. Both are targeting 2022 and formats you've never seen before.

In addition to these two titles, we have two brand new [D&D] settings in early development, as well as a return to a setting we've already covered. (No, these are not M:tG worlds.)

As I mentioned in the dev blog, we develop more material than we publish, so it's possible one or more of these last three won't reach production. But as of right now, they're all looking great.

Of course the phrase "two more products that revive 'classic' settings" could be interpreted in different ways. It might not be two individual setting books.

 

[Minigiant]

Calling it

One of the new settings will be a bright war setting or a grim political setting.

For the D&D PC AND CONSOLE STRATEGY GAME!

 

[Jaeger]

I must be missing something here.

Wasn’t one of the chief sins leveled against TSR during the 2e era that they released too many settings that competed against each other, and fractured the player base?

Or is that now just regarded as WOTC 3e propaganda these days...?

 

[Maxperson]

I must be missing something here.

Wasn’t one of the chief sins leveled against TSR during the 2e era that they released too many settings that competed against each other, and fractured the player base?

Or is that now just regarded as WOTC 3e propaganda these days...?

TSR went further and developed supplement after supplement for their settings. That sort of forced you to specialize in whichever setting or two you really liked. 5e settings are VERY limited in scope and most of the crunch makes it into general release books. Their books are around a general core that you can very easily plug their generic settings into. You can buy all the settings if you want to and just flip around from campaign to campaign.

 

[Mecheon]

Plus, 2E's settings reinvented the wheel and constantly competed against one another. 5E's settings tend to compliment each other and include a bunch of suggestions on how to re-use things for other settings. "Don't care about Greyhawk? Buy Saltmarsh anyway for the boat rules and the setpieces to slot into whatever coastal cities you want. Don't care about the Realms? Frostmaiden's still got a bunch of wintery setpieces!"

 

[Parmandur]

I must be missing something here.

Wasn’t one of the chief sins leveled against TSR during the 2e era that they released too many settings that competed against each other, and fractured the player base?

Or is that now just regarded as WOTC 3e propaganda these days...?

5E Setting books are more generally useful books of genre pacific material, not super in depth like 2E material could become.

 

[Urriak Uruk]

I will say, there only seems to be one constant for 5E; when the FR fan are certain their dream book is coming, it's not.

The "returning to a setting we've covered" sounds like FR, but it's not certain either. Maybe it will be Greyhawk as the test baby for "gold as XP, old-D&D style sword and sorcery book."

 

[Yaarel]

I will say, there only seems to be one constant for 5E; when the FR fan are certain their dream book is coming, it's not.

The "returning to a setting we've covered" sounds like FR, but it's not certain either. Maybe it will be Greyhawk as the test baby for "gold as XP, old-D&D style sword and sorcery book."

I think that is the "classic setting" but yeah.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

As for new settings.....I'd love a non-European setting.

My bet is a post apocalypse one. At least, that's what I'd do if I was them. The idea is very popular, and really does offer an easy entry point for many. Something like Gamma World or Rifts or even Arcana of the Ancients.......

I’d bet a fiver the new settings won’t be primarily/heavily European.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

You know, more streaming shiw tie-ins sound plausible.

Ya know, I’d pay higher than average book price for a book co-written by Brennan Lee Mulligan and Molly Ostertag.

But the stuff I want will never happen, like an Eberron cartoon by either Pendleton Ward or Noelle Stevenson. Or Wotc allowing Margaret Weiss to rewrite the Dragonlance Chronicles entire, or Earthsea as a D&D setting, or wotc getting the Star Wars license again.

Ive learned to settle for thinking new stuff is cool, and making my own stuff.

 

[OblivionDrive]

I must be missing something here.

Wasn’t one of the chief sins leveled against TSR during the 2e era that they released too many settings that competed against each other, and fractured the player base?

Or is that now just regarded as WOTC 3e propaganda these days...?

They also dropped just shy of a billion* supplemental releases for each setting too. Multiple new books dropping almost every month made it nigh impossible to not sustain a loss.

That said, the player base has also grown, I would estimate, substantially these days, so they may be willing to risk it and see if the market will sustain a slightly increased schedule. If not, they’ll likely drop it back down to a more manageable level, but I doubt with as risk adverse as they’ve been until now that they’d do this without a boatload of data backing the move.

* may or may not be a slight bit of hyperbole on my part.