D&D 5E How do you hope WotC treats the upcoming classic settings?

[Stormonu]

Dark Sun is the one I'm more concerned with - I'd like to see it rolled back to the first boxed set and the metaplot removed. Leave the mystery of where the Sorcerer Dynasts came from up to the DM. Go back to the original map, or like @Steampunkette suggested, just give us local maps for the city states and make the world beyond that wide open to what the DM wants to make it. Maybe even the lands outside the city state are in such turmoil that they physically fluctuate over time.

Also, I don't want everyone to have psionics, that'd be as bad as everyone having spells. Save it for PCs, named NPCs and various monsters.

I wouldn't mind if they found a niche for all the classes, since they aren't so tied to alignment any more, but I would like to see restraint towards the playable PC races - a return to humanocentric with demihuman and monster PCs being mechanically less likely.

-------
Planescape I never got too deep into, but if it returns, definately want the factions and the Great Wheel back for it. I wouldn't be against throwing in elements of the Astral Sea and Spelljammer, but I would prefer to see Spelljammer kept separate.

 

[Urriak Uruk]

I realize this is often a contentious issue, but D&D books aren't expensive. It's been more than 30 years, but I think AD&D 2nd edition PHB retailed for $18.00 back in 1989 which is close to the equivalent of $40 today. The books I'm purchasing for $40 today are much higher in quality than the $18 books I bought in 1989.

I'll admit $40 for a harcover book with the quality of art/writing for D&D 5E is a fair price for what you're getting... but yes, $40 is a lot of money to pitch some folks for a book.

Even if you think $40 is not a lot... $100 definitely is, and will certainly push away folks who may otherwise be interested.

 

[Hussar]

My question: why bother (remake Greyhawk)? What's the point? If you want a classic setting adjusted to the modern era, why not the Realms? Or why not just create a new setting?

Greyhawk is different than most classic settings in that it didn't really evolve beyond its original form. Sure, there was the stuff in the 90s, but for most, the "true Greyhawk" is the World box set (or maybe the folio).

I'm not suggesting not bringing it back in a deluxe set, perhaps one that incorporates older elements with newer (better) production value. But I don't see any point in re-envisioning it towards modern sensibilities. It seems unnecessary and creatively lazy.

Don't tell that to Paizo. @Eric Mona has done a TON of work on Greyhawk, as have the folks at Canonfire. Greyhawk is probably better supported now than it has for a very long time. Good grief, there are 9 Oerth Journals since the release of 5e. That's about 400 pages of material for GH. And GH most certainly isn't "the World Box Set" for GH fans.

 

[Sorcerers Apprentice]

I hope they're going to let the settings be unique. Don't force in every race and class from the PHB, and be willing to make changes to core game mechanics if it helps represent the theme of the setting.

I hope for this from any brand new settings too, actually.

 

[Hussar]

I hope they're going to let the settings be unique. Don't force in every race and class from the PHB, and be willing to make changes to core game mechanics if it helps represent the theme of the setting.

I hope for this from any brand new settings too, actually.

I get this, I really do, but, I imagine that's a pretty hard sell at WotC. If a setting doesn't have X, Y and Z, then anyone who wants to play those isn't going to buy that setting. And, I think, it more or less runs into the Gnome Effect. Sure, gnomes aren't played that often, but, they still show up at about 1/4 of tables (or whatever the number). So, a setting that doesn't have gnomes (insert whatever you like here) is writing off that many tables before you even start.

I think it's pretty hard to get a concept out into the wild that starts with such a big handicap. I do get the notion. I really do and, frankly, I'd rather see a setting that is unique and leans hard into its uniqueness. But, that comes with a hefty price.

I guess it comes down to seeing a setting as a toolkit or an encyclopedia. D&D previously went the encyclopedia route - Setting X has these features, Setting Y has these different features. 5e, with things like the Ravenloft books, and Ghosts of Saltmarsh, are more trying to straddle the line -something for those who want to dive into setting building AND something for those who just want to play.

It's a really, really delicate balance I think.

 

[Sorcerers Apprentice]

I get this, I really do, but, I imagine that's a pretty hard sell at WotC. If a setting doesn't have X, Y and Z, then anyone who wants to play those isn't going to buy that setting. And, I think, it more or less runs into the Gnome Effect. Sure, gnomes aren't played that often, but, they still show up at about 1/4 of tables (or whatever the number). So, a setting that doesn't have gnomes (insert whatever you like here) is writing off that many tables before you even start.

It's generally DMs who buy setting books, not players. So I don't think many sales would be lost to players who won't buy a setting without gnomes, since they wouldn't buy it even if it had gnomes.

 

[Azuresun]

Dark Sun is the one I'm more concerned with - I'd like to see it rolled back to the first boxed set and the metaplot removed. Leave the mystery of where the Sorcerer Dynasts came from up to the DM. Go back to the original map, or like @Steampunkette suggested, just give us local maps for the city states and make the world beyond that wide open to what the DM wants to make it. Maybe even the lands outside the city state are in such turmoil that they physically fluctuate over time.

I like the 4e take on it--Kalak is dead and Tyr is a troubled free city (so the grimdark isn't quite so relentless), but the sillier stuff from the metaplot hasn't happened.

 

[Argyle King]

"Taking into a new direction," and "Kill it if you have to" are not the same thing. His opinion is also not presented as correct, the protagonist (Rey) completely rejects it. Which she should, as her friends are getting killed right outside the window.

I shouldn't be debating Star Wars though, because no one ever changes their mind...

Arguably, Rey is the villain.

She completed Palpatine's mission of corrupting/hijacking the Skywalker bloodline.

 

[pming]

Hiya!

Um no. Any setting that sees a 5E version needs to be fully updated to modern sensibilities and all the old uncomfortable, or outright sexist and racist, material fully corrected or thrown out completely.

Um, no. Any setting that sees a 5e version does NOT need to be "updated to modern sensibilities...etc". Why? Let me put it to you this way: would you be fine with ME making the decision as to what is "modern sensibilities, etc"? Is that cool with you?

What's that I hear your brain saying.. "Wait...". Yeah, that. That little pause of trepidation about allowing someone other than yourself to determine what is "sensible", "not sexist", "not racist", etc. Basically...morals and ethics I guess. I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say... You don't "trust my sensibilities, etc", because you don't know me. Well... that's the EXACT SAME REASONING from my, and other's, points of view.

Who gets to decide what is "ok" and what is "not ok"? I'll tell you who: You do. You see/read something and think "Ok, cool", or you think "Wait, that seems unfair" or you think "OMG!? What the carp?!". Nobody can make that decision for you.

What's not ok in my view: Someone else deciding what I get to read, watch, or write about because they read something and think it's "bad". No thanks. I can make up my own mind and choices about what I find acceptable or not.

Greyhawk as been around for decades, almost a half century at this point. It's already written... WHY do so many people think it's a good idea to try and re-write history? I don't get it. Just write something new with what YOU want to write. Then others will read it and they will think "Ok, cool", "Wait, that seems unfair" or "OMG!? What the carp?!". That's when you know how close you are to "modern sensibilities"...at least as far as the target audience is concerned.

If you wan to write your own version of Greyhawk (or Dragonlance, Faerune, Cerilia, Athas, etc) with your own sense of morals/ethics/beliefs... go for it! Enjoy! PLEASE! Do that and spend the next 40 years playing and having fun with your friends. Just leave the original and official version alone... it doesn't need "updating" any more than Shakespeare's "Taming of the Shrew" or Dante's "Inferno", etc.

^_^

Paul L. Ming

 

[Quickleaf]

I'm enjoying listening to others for now, and have put my opinions on the shelf for the moment.

One example regarding Spelljammer that @ersatzphil presented involves the excellent idea of an adventure featuring spelljamming, the illithids, and venturing to the Far Realm (as the "scary new setting" Chris Perkins mentioned). I love that because it offers a chance to explore something wrong in the "the space between worlds", and that blending of voyage fantasy, weird fantasy, and Lovecraftian fantasy could really hit a sweet spot. It brings a twist to what I'd expect with Spelljammer having a more swashbuckling theme. A recent example that comes to mind is the film Shadow in the Cloud - not as an example that transfers 1-to-1 to Spelljammer, but as a fascinating example of blending some of the aforementioned genres to create something unique. Besides enlisting Jeff Grubb, and a potential Baldur's Gate 3 tie-in, I think a single or a limited-run comic book would be an awesome addition; back in the day DC produced a 15-run Spelljammer comic series (no idea if it was objectively good, but I remember reading the first one as a kid and loving it).