D&D 5E D&D's Classic Settings Are Not 'One Shots'

In an interview with ComicBook.com, WotC's Jeremy Crawford talked about the visits to Ravenloft, Eberron, Spelljammer, Dragonlance, and (the upcoming) Planescape we've seen over the last couple of years, and their intentions for the future.

He indicated that they plan to revisit some of these settings again in the future, noting that the setting books are among their most popular books.

We love [the campaign setting books], because they help highlight just how wonderfully rich D&D is. They highlight that D&D can be gothic horror. D&D can be fantasy in space. D&D can be trippy adventures in the afterlife, in terms of Planescape. D&D can be classic high fantasy, in the form of the Forgotten Realms. It can be sort of a steampunk-like fantasy, like in Eberron. We feel it's vital to visit these settings, to tell stories in them. And we look forward to returning to them. So we do not view these as one-shots.

- Jeremy Crawford​

The whole 'multiverse' concept that D&D is currently exploring plays into this, giving them opportunities to resist worlds.

When asked about the release schedule of these books, Crawford noted that the company plans its release schedule so that players get chance to play the material, not just read it, and they don't want to swamp people with too much content to use.

Our approach to how we design for the game and how we plan out the books for it is a play-first approach. At certain times in D&D's history, it's really been a read-first approach. Because we've had points in our history where we were producing so many books each year, there was no way anyone could play all of it. In some years it would be hard to play even a small percentage of the number of things that come out. Because we have a play-first approach, we want to make sure we're coming out with things at a pace where if you really wanted to, and even that would require a lot of weekends and evenings dedicated to D&D play, you could play a lot of it.

- Jeremy Crawford​

You can read more in the interview at ComicBook.com.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Also, the aesthetic of steampunk is the important part and the hopeful exuberance for technology actually making life better is part of that aesthetic. No one actually cares about the 'punk' part of any punk. Especially cyber. People want robot arms, not how much people hated and feared Japan in the 80's.

Then for god's sake don't put the punk in the name. It's just insulting to the critical source material that they're turning into a cheesy aesthetic.

Being hopeful and exuberant about the 1800s, to me, strikes me as profoundly messed-up and creepy as hell. It's not re-appropriating the tools of the oppressor (and you cannot build your house with the tools of the oppressor anyway), it's just mindlessly celebrating the aesthetic of horrific people and horrific times.

And it's pretty silly to make out cyberpunk as a genre was just about hating and fearing Japan when some of the best cyberpunk came OUT of Japan. In the West there was certainly some Japan-o-phobia, but that's actually better express in non-cyberpunk genre fiction of the day. No cyberpunk novel I'm aware of is remotely as fetishistic about or fearful/hateful of Japan as say, Michael Critchon's Rising Sun, for example. And that's a pretty high bar given Idoru exists.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I mean, I'm not sure it ever was a critical genre so much as an offhand injoke involving in Tim Powers and his friends?

I mean, t'was murdered before it could be born, as it were. But yeah very briefly it was a critical genre in the 1980s, there are a number of books that fit, and then the existence of The Difference Engine popularized the term, and within a few bloody years we've got people basically worshipping one of the most depraved aesthetics in history, and calling it steampunk when all they really mean is Victoriana.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Then for god's sake don't put the punk in the name. It's just insulting to the critical source material that they're turning into a cheesy aesthetic.

I'm sorry about how human language works?

Being hopeful and exuberant about the 1800s, to me, strikes me as profoundly messed-up and creepy as hell. It's not re-appropriating the tools of the oppressor (and you cannot build your house with the tools of the oppressor anyway), it's just mindlessly celebrating the aesthetic of horrific people and horrific times.

You're missing a very important thing here: It's not being hopeful and exuberant about the 1800's. It's about specifically the relationship with technology of the time.

In the technological timeline, this was a time when people were seeing the new hotness--actual new hotness- drop almost every day and actually hold the promise of making their lives better. Where there was a genuine belief that anything was possible through the power of elegant, easy to understand inventions created by independent individuals. You weren't hoping to get function from some sad soap bar with a black slate screen, you were getting miracles out of magical constructs of polished wood and brass.

It's fantasy. Not some kind of historical introspection there to satisfy teenaged ennui.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

There is no way--no way in all Nine Hells--that product would ever make it past a Cultural Sensitivity expert today.

Given I was like "Yo this book is racist as hell..." in the early 1990s, yeah I don't think it would make it past anyone under about 45, not even pretty insensitive people.

 

[Parmandur]

Given I was like "Yo this book is racist as hell..." in the early 1990s, yeah I don't think it would make it past anyone under about 45, not even pretty insensitive people.

Only TSR at the tail end of the 80's...

My mom is from Widconsin, and I spent time there in the 80's and 90's, and...this makes sense to me.

 

[Reynard]

I'm sorry about how human language works?


You're missing a very important thing here: It's not being hopeful and exuberant about the 1800's. It's about specifically the relationship with technology of the time.

In the technological timeline, this was a time when people were seeing the new hotness--actual new hotness- drop almost every day and actually hold the promise of making their lives better. Where there was a genuine belief that anything was possible through the power of elegant, easy to understand inventions created by independent individuals. You weren't hoping to get function from some sad soap bar with a black slate screen, you were getting miracles out of magical constructs of polished wood and brass.

It's fantasy. Not some kind of historical introspection there to satisfy teenaged ennui.

I find this super funny because you absolutely could use the 1800s as a way to talk about the very fraught relationship humans have with technology. For example, it is uncontroversial to say that electric light changed the world. it is probably the most significant innovation until the microprocessor. It freed people from the shackles of the sun. But it also allowed horrible abuses of labor.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

You're missing a very important thing here: It's not being hopeful and exuberant about the 1800's. It's about specifically the relationship with technology of the time.

In the technological timeline, this was a time when people were seeing the new hotness--actual new hotness- drop almost every day and actually hold the promise of making their lives better. Where there was a genuine belief that anything was possible through the power of elegant, easy to understand inventions created by independent individuals. You weren't hoping to get function from some sad soap bar with a black slate screen, you were getting miracles out of magical constructs of polished wood and brass.

But in reality it absolutely is about celebrating the 1800s, because instead of providing an alternative aesthetic to go along with this alternative world (and 1800s which wasn't full brutal oppression would have a different aesthetic, and would not have had the same kind of manners or aristocrats or the like - the high societies that, for example, Castle Falkenstein imagines simply cannot exist without massive exploitation/oppression - where do you think these do-nothing aristos engaging in poncey duels get all the money from?), it absolutely latches on the worst part of the Victorian aesthetic. By doing so, the real-world result is that people think that period was vastly horrific than actually was. That might not have been the intention, but it's been the impact. People today just do not get how horrifying that period was if they grew up with steampunk imagery.

It's fantasy. Not some kind of historical introspection there to satisfy teenaged ennui.

It is indeed a fantasy, a revisionist fantasy that helps replace a horrific past with imagined fun one.

Just erases the horrors of millions of people of all races, especially women, in favour of talking about how cool people in top hats and goggles are. If it wasn't a European/American aesthetic primarily that was being used this way, I don't think you'd be on board with this.

 

[Vaalingrade]

But in reality it absolutely is about celebrating the 1800s,

Nope.

The 1800's is not necessary for steampunk just like the 1980's isn't necessary for cyberpunk.

 

[Vaalingrade]

I find this super funny because you absolutely could use the 1800s as a way to talk about the very fraught relationship humans have with technology. For example, it is uncontroversial to say that electric light changed the world. it is probably the most significant innovation until the microprocessor. It freed people from the shackles of the sun. But it also allowed horrible abuses of labor.

You could. but that's not the point.

We know how the Industrial revolution turned out. We know how the digital one turned out.

But if we give up hope on things ever turning out well, we might as well not try to advance. That's the point. If we spend all our time navel gazing and obsessing over negatives, and refusing to learn from them because we're constantly glorifying accentuating the negative, we'll never be able to create a positive.

 

[Reynard]

We know how the digital one turned out.

We won't know that until the AI write it for us.