D&D 5E Further Future D&D Product Speculation

[Jer]

The core problem with Greyhawk as a setting product is, what do you do as the player character options content?

I disagree. The core problem with Greyhawk as a setting product is the audience for such a product.

Wizards is never going to be able to put out a Greyhawk for 5e that would make the majority of Greyhawk fans happy - first of all because Greyhawk fans all have different ideas of what Greyhawk should be. And second of all because anything that Wizards puts out would be an update to the setting - not just the rules - we can see this in how they've handled Ravenloft, how it looks like they've handled Spelljammer, and how they're proposing to handle Dragonlance. The question is whether those updates would work and bring in new players interested in those settings or if they'd just alienate the existing audience for Greyhawk without bringing in new players.

It's a landmine for a setting that is not likely to pay off for them in the mass market in the way that revamping Ravenloft or Spelljammer will - the feel of Greyhawk is counter to current trends in modern fantasy, and is very rooted in pre-D&D fantasy ideas, while both Ravenloft and Spelljammer are in line with different strands of modern fantasy.

Now I will be the first to say that I could be very wrong about this because a year ago I would have said that Dragonlance was also a landmine of a setting for similar, though not exactly the same reasons (actually having more to do with Weis and Hickman still being alive and being very vocal and protective of "their" setting, and the fanbase around the setting that agrees with Weis and Hickman on who should direct the development of it regardless of who actually owns it, along with elements in the setting that are very dated to put out in a modern product and yet the core fanbase gets very protective of) and they've decided to do it anyway. So maybe they'll figure out how to make it profitable for themselves and do it anyway.

But I'd still bet on a big Realms thing as part of the 50th anniversary rollout instead.

 

[Parmandur]

But I'd still bet on a big Realms thing as part of the 50th anniversary rollout instead.

Wanna do an Avatar bet? Anyone else want in on this action? Team Greyhawk versus Team Reqlms?

 

[Parmandur]

So we could hard-guarantee no Factions, for sure.

Well, just to pick this bit out, I would go the opposite and think we would see a hard dive in on the Factions as central to the core book.

Page count is fungible I'm terms of the format, most likely, but a focused 64 page book can get a lot done as a starter.

 

[Jer]

Wanna do an Avatar bet? Anyone else want in on this action? Team Greyhawk versus Team Reqlms?

Sure - though it's a long ways out for a bet. 2 years until the 50th anniversary. What timespan are you thinking? An announcement before the end of 2024 of a Greyhawk release?

(I'd also say it has to be a legitimate Greyhawk release, not a stealth release like Ghosts of Saltmarsh where they publish revamped older material and discuss Greyhawk as a possible setting - I think another Ghosts of Saltmarsh type release is very likely as a 50th anniversary release, if they can figure out what older adventures they have left to revamp).

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Well, just to pick this bit out, I would go the opposite and think we would see a hard dive in on the Factions as central to the core book.

Page count is fungible I'm terms of the format, most likely, but a focused 64 page book can get a lot done as a starter.

There's just no way you can explain a dozen factions (and likely associated mechanics) AND Sigil AND even begin to explain the planes in even the world's most focused 64-page book. You could do two of those in a much-reduced form, but all three? I don't think the original spent 192 pages on that just because it was waffling. If they dropped the adventure and just had a 64-page "player book" which had most of the stuff on the Factions in it (as well as player mechanics), that could work. I can't see a 64-page bestiary for PS which isn't 80% "Who cares?" or "Variant on on a monster seen once a campaign even in Planescape" though. Which does give me some hope they might not do that.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Wanna do an Avatar bet? Anyone else want in on this action? Team Greyhawk versus Team Reqlms?

I don't know what an Avatar bet is, but my imaginary money is unfortunately kind of split, as I fully expect both:

A) An update to the FR by or on the 50th, with a much wider-ranging book than SCAG.

B) Greyhawk presented as an adventure, similar to Dragonlance. Probably an update to some "classic" adventure that's already been updated a bunch in other editions.

 

[Parmandur]

Sure - though it's a long ways out for a bet. 2 years until the 50th anniversary. What timespan are you thinking? An announcement before the end of 2024 of a Greyhawk release?

(I'd also say it has to be a legitimate Greyhawk release, not a stealth release like Ghosts of Saltmarsh where they publish revamped older material and discuss Greyhawk as a possible setting - I think another Ghosts of Saltmarsh type release is very likely as a 50th anniversary release, if they can figure out what older adventures they have left to revamp).

Yeah, it's a long ways off, but why not? If it turns out what Winninger is teasing is Greyhawk or the Forgotten Realms. Bet off it turns out to be Eberron or something.

 

[delericho]

I have to say personally, I'm actively put off by including adventures in products. WotC doesn't tend to produce adventures I find terribly useful as a DM, and at least when they've done it in other books, they tended to keep it pretty concise and I didn't feel ripped-off in the way I do by devoting 1/3rd of the page count to that.

I mostly agree. I did find that the adventures in the Ravenloft and Eberron books were a good use of space, but that was because they were just long enough to show the flavour of the setting without eating too much space. Using up fully a third of the page count seems excessive.

And I also agree with you about the adventures in general. "Lost Mine of Phandelver" is great, but it's a shining exception, IMO.

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

D&D can't be always totally exact in the same way it was created. How to explain it with any example? Let's remember the times famous characters from comics being adapted to cartoons or action-live movies. Those teams have got different styles, and they can't, and even they shouldn't be 100% as the original. Some changes are allowed by the fandom, but others aren't really wellcome. James Bond played by different actors had got different styles, and the original one from the novels wouldn't be accepted too much for the modern audience. Flash Gordon is other example. This franchise in the 2022 can't be like the version of 1940, or 1980. How many times "Legend of Zelda", "Castlevania" or "Transformers" have been rebooted?

We shouldn'd reject the changes, but let's wonder what changes are necessary or wellcome but not others.

 

[Warpiglet-7]

I think, but do not know, it’s Greyhawk.

Battle box goes great with it, especially an expansion.
It’s been visited before in Saltmarsh.
It’s an important date.
Luke Gygax would be a fantastic partner.
GaryCon would be an amazing venue to show it off and have a D&D Direct like thing.

I hope you’re right. I missed out on grey hawk—-my dm grabbed the gray boxes set of the realms because he thought it was sparser and less populated by heroes!

I will buy that up, preorder it….really enjoyed the deities in 3rd edition…

Throw in some traditional stuff! Go crazy with the citadel and feywild but throw a bone!