D&D 5E Dark Sun, problematic content, and 5E…

[Micah Sweet]

So by that definition, al quadim, Kara tur and lots of other settings weren’t “original” since most are either set in the “prime” or were written by people brought in for that project.

Your criteria for a new setting is ridiculous.

Fair enough. Witchlight gets a pass.

 

[Zardnaar]

The funny thing is if WOTC had created a purist Dark Sun conversion and adventure for 5e and it flopped and got tons of bad press, many fans who are upset about this decision would blame the new audience for getting upset or being disinterested and not buying it up.

I wouldn't. If it flopped it happens no big deal.

You can tone down a lot eg the genocide stuff came later it wasn't in the original boxed set.

Can't really retcon slavery away though it's very ingrained in the setting.

I think the only way you could do it is wind back to the original set and make it explicitly that evil win and the heroes are the last hope/embers.

Have some sort of "dark side" mechanic. If the PCs fall they have to redeem and if tg
hey don't they're retired create a new character (or break one out from your character tree).

Essentially remove the option of becoming a defiler/slaver from PC options.

Anything after the original boxed set can essentially be ignored.

 

[Faolyn]

Wild Behind the Witchlight -set in the Feywild.

Involving brand new things, in a setting that had not been fleshed out in this edition.

Journeys...- all made by independent writers brought on for that project.

And an entirely new setting.

The fact that it was made my independent writers does not make it unoriginal or not a WotC setting.

No new settings there from WotC as far as I can see.

Sure, if you define "new setting" as "something that can only be written by someone who has worked for WotC for years," sure.

I'd say that bringing in a whole new writing team is better than relying on the older writers, since it means that the setting truly is new.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Involving brand new things, in a setting that had not been fleshed out in this edition.


And an entirely new setting.

The fact that it was made my independent writers does not make it unoriginal or not a WotC setting.


Sure, if you define "new setting" as "something that can only be written by someone who has worked for WotC for years," sure.

I'd say that bringing in a whole new writing team is better than relying on the older writers, since it means that the setting truly is new.

I accept Witchlight as a new setting from WotC (although, as @Hussar says, not one I particularly like), but to me the Journeys settings are just as much WotC's as Wildemount was. More, I suppose, since Mercer still owns his setting, but it does nothing to support creativity on the part of WotC's actual creative staff.

Creators make new settings for 5e all the time. I have dozens on my digital shelf. What's stopping WotC from doing the same?

 

[Faolyn]

I accept Witchlight as a new setting from WotC (although, as @Hussar says, not one I particularly like), but to me the Journeys settings are just as much WotC's as Wildemount was. More, I suppose, since Mercer still owns his setting, but it does nothing to support creativity on the part of WotC's actual creative staff.

Creators make new settings for 5e all the time. I have dozens on my digital shelf. What's stopping WotC from doing the same?

Those settings didn't exist until WotC commissioned them.

In much the same way that Eberron didn't exist until WotC held a contest.

They are all WotC settings.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Those settings didn't exist until WotC commissioned them.

In much the same way that Eberron didn't exist until WotC held a contest.

They are all WotC settings.

Yes, in exactly that way. WotC requested settings from outside the company, and Keith Baker got to publish his world, Eberron, to which he and other have since contributed. He has continued to add more material to it on his own ever since. But he was still an outside contractor, just like Matt Mercer and the folks commissioned for Journeys.

 

[Faolyn]

Yes, in exactly that way. WotC requested settings from outside the company, and Keith Baker got to publish his world, Eberron, to which he and other have since contributed. He has continued to add more material to it on his own ever since. But he was still an outside contractor, just like Matt Mercer and the folks commissioned for Journeys.

And Eberron is a WotC setting.

Just like Radiant Citadel is.

 

[Micah Sweet]

And Eberron is a WotC setting.

Just like Radiant Citadel is.

If you mean, "is legally owned by WotC", then yes.

 

[Minigiant]

I wouldn't. If it flopped it happens no big deal.

You can tone down a lot eg the genocide stuff came later it wasn't in the original boxed set.

Can't really retcon slavery away though it's very ingrained in the setting.

I think the only way you could do it us wind back to the original set and make it explicitly that evil win and the heroes are the last hope/embers.

Have some sort of "dark side" mechanic. If the PCs fall they have to redeem and if tgey don't they're retired create a new character (or break on out from your character tree).

Essentially remove the option of becoming a defiler/slaver from PC options.

Anything after the original boxed set xan essentially be ignored.

My point is that if WOTC did Dark Sun without changing anything and it flopped, many fans of it would blame the 5e audience for not liking it.

But that's the point, old school Dark Sun is probably too problematic to make WOTC enough money to bother doing it.

 

[Minigiant]

Witchlight and Radiant Citadel feel more like demi-settings. Places you inject into other settings.

But then technically Ravenloft would be the same.