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.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Of course not. But there is no reason to reinvent the wheel just because the spokes need changing. Why make a whole new setting just because some elements of it no longer work?

Why re-invent a setting to keep recycling its IP when you can make a new setting that is actually designed to do what you want it to do?

 

[Scribe]

Why re-invent a setting to keep recycling its IP when you can make a new setting that is actually designed to do what you want it to do?

Cost. Nostalgia. Name recognition.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Cost. Nostalgia. Name recognition.

All garbage reasons from my point of view.

 

[Scribe]

All garbage reasons from my point of view.

Not making a value judgment, but it is what it is.

 

[Li Shenron]

Dragonlance is my favorite. But let’s face it all their settings are missed opportunities. They should be living settings where things happen like KP Midgard. Instead they make one dimensional settings forever stuck in time. The books lack worldbuilding and really only serve as a narrow slice, just a jump off point for an adventure that really has little context to the broader world.

Interesting point...

TBH my preference is actually a setting "forever stuck in time", but I can see the appeal of a living setting. Doesn't suit me only because I'm too slow and I would not want to adapt my campaigns to a continuously updated metaplot.

But it does feel a bit like 5e setting books are a (half)missed opportunity. They are more like an introductory adventure to the setting, which is never followed up because of the very limited release schedule. I am not advocating going back to the crazy 3e release schedule, but 3e had much more substantial settings books.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Interesting point...

TBH my preference is actually a setting "forever stuck in time", but I can see the appeal of a living setting. Doesn't suit me only because I'm too slow and I would not want to adapt my campaigns to a continuously updated metaplot.

But it does feel a bit like 5e setting books are a (half)missed opportunity. They are more like an introductory adventure to the setting, which is never followed up because of the very limited release schedule. I am not advocating going back to the crazy 3e release schedule, but 3e had much more substantial settings books.

I think Freeport's metaplot is about the right speed. Each edition of the core book -- there have been four, I think, since 2005 or thereabouts -- says that "yes, all the adventures published since the last edition happened canonically," but not in a way that the player characters couldn't have been responsible for the altered history, and there's a real emphasis on keeping everything still very table-friendly. If something is taken away, something that fulfills the same general role, but larger and more detailed, is provided to replace it as the city grows and changes.

In a lot of ways, it's the opposite of what they did to the Forgotten Realms during 4E. Even if the designers were right to want to shake up the map (I certainly would, if I were them), taking stuff off the table and replacing it with completely different stuff means that groups can't continue playing the kind of campaigns they liked in the past, which was extremely shortsighted.

OTOH, there have been two public editions of Ptolus ever, and I kind of love that I can keep using this same campaign book until I'm too frail to pick it up, without worrying it's ever going to be obsoleted. Only minimal content changes were made when updating it from 3E to 5E/Cypher.

 

[Maxperson]

Anything is better than twisting a classic setting to conform to modern desires, including not doing it at all. I mean, sailing on the Astral Sea was a separate thing from Spelljammer anyway; there was a great Dragon article on the subject back in the day.

I'll die on this hill.

I'm okay a bit of modernization. For example, I wouldn't find it hard to figure out a place for sorcerers and warlocks on Athas. Plenty of beings to enter into pacts with and sorcerers can fit into the preserving/defiling theme pretty easily.

 

[Maxperson]

I suspect that, when Greenwood dies, they are going to permanently retire Elminster at the same time. It'll be framed as a way to honor Greenwood's memory, but there will be developers who will be viewing it as a chance to open up the setting without all-powerful legacy characters hanging around.

I doubt it. There are dozens of them and he's by far the most popular and well known. There would be an uproar if they tried it.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I doubt it. There are dozens of them and he's by far the most popular and well known. There would be an uproar if they tried it.

We'll see. Hopefully it will happen so far in the future, neither of us remember this conversation.

 

[MichaelSomething]

Bring back Greyhawk! That setting is the ultimate in being adventurer friendly while not being overloaded with lore.