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.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

while not being overloaded with lore.

Oh, they've given it the old college try over the last three decades.

 

[Micah Sweet]

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.

Sure. Additive is fine, even retroactively if it doesn't change what already happened.

 

[Remathilis]

The real reason they will just update settings, is that 1, they are beloved, and 2, it takes a ton of work to create something new.

You can't underestimate the power of brand recognition. Most gamers are familiar with Ravenloft or Dragonlance, even if they don't know much more than the basic premise. Strahd and Soth are iconic to D&D. That is worth more than any amount of internal consistency.

When Star Wars ejected the EU in favor of the new timeline, it was amazing how quickly many of the beloved elements returned. We're getting Grand Admiral Thrawn in Asoka and only the most hardline fans are sneering about how his story doesn't involve Jorrus, Mara Jade, or Luuke. Thrawn was too big to leave in the dustbin. And anyone thinking that he would be abandoned alongside the Zahn trilogy doesn't understand the first thing about branding.

 

[Mecheon]

Sure. Additive is fine, even retroactively if it doesn't change what already happened.

The problem is at lot of what's already happened is kind of, bad. Ravenloft is the big example of this were a lot of the domains are Just Bad. Not like 'evil bad' but 'I kind of get where you're coming from but man you didn't just fail to stick the landing, you ruined it'

There is a point where being beholden to bad decisions in the past shouldn't be a thing and, sorry big lore fans, but D&D is long since past it. Even Sherlock Holmes didn't stick to its canon all the time and that was just one person writing. This is a game series where the whole thing is your character goes off and has adventures, including entire books of "Here's how to cause an apocalypse in your setting", and "Party grows so powerful it ends up turning Oerth into a salt mine" is downright famous as a series of events. Canon should serve people playing, not be an eternal chain around player's necks keeping them to 40 year old ideas that are irrelevant to a modern audiance

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

You can't underestimate the power of brand recognition. Most gamers are familiar with Ravenloft or Dragonlance, even if they don't know much more than the basic premise. Strahd and Soth are iconic to D&D. That is worth more than any amount of internal consistency.

When Star Wars ejected the EU in favor of the new timeline, it was amazing how quickly many of the beloved elements returned. We're getting Grand Admiral Thrawn in Asoka and only the most hardline fans are sneering about how his story doesn't involve Jorrus, Mara Jade, or Luuke. Thrawn was too big to leave in the dustbin. And anyone thinking that he would be abandoned alongside the Zahn trilogy doesn't understand the first thing about branding.

That's why I'm bemused when people get upset about WotC saying that only 5E lore counts. They have already shown a desire to bring back all the good stuff (allowing for personal tastes). They just don't want to be beholden to keeping the lore consistent about who is shoeing horses in Daggerdale or what kind of underwear Volo prefers.

The dumb stuff from the past will (mostly) get dumped and the good stuff from the past will (mostly) get brought forward.

 

[Hussar]

All garbage reasons from my point of view.

And this is why having hobby gamers in charge of DnD led to bankruptcy and having business people in charge has led to the largest growth of the hobby ever.

I prefer the latter thanks.

 

[Remathilis]

The problem is at lot of what's already happened is kind of, bad. Ravenloft is the big example of this were a lot of the domains are Just Bad. Not like 'evil bad' but 'I kind of get where you're coming from but man you didn't just fail to stick the landing, you ruined it'

There is a point where being beholden to bad decisions in the past shouldn't be a thing and, sorry big lore fans, but D&D is long since past it. Even Sherlock Holmes didn't stick to its canon all the time and that was just one person writing. This is a game series where the whole thing is your character goes off and has adventures, including entire books of "Here's how to cause an apocalypse in your setting", and "Party grows so powerful it ends up turning Oerth into a salt mine" is downright famous as a series of events. Canon should serve people playing, not be an eternal chain around player's necks keeping them to 40 year old ideas that are irrelevant to a modern audience

Exactly. While I don't feel any domain was made with malice, I feel a number of them don't really fit what a modern audience will take. Some of Ravenloft's ideas were pastiche when they were being written.

And it's not like TSR was the guardians of internal consistency either; Ravenloft has had to eject whole novels from canon to preserve continuity. Tristan Hirregard had three origin stories that were mutually exclusive.

 

[Parmandur]

Exactly. While I don't feel any domain was made with malice, I feel a number of them don't really fit what a modern audience will take. Some of Ravenloft's ideas were pastiche when they were being written.

And it's not like TSR was the guardians of internal consistency either; Ravenloft has had to eject whole novels from canon to preserve continuity. Tristan Hirregard had three origin stories that were mutually exclusive.

Tracy Hickman actively hated the whole Setting, too, which is a big reason that Curse of Strahd is a bit of a revoor...they worked with Hickman to make a vision of Rwvenloft that fit the original idea better...and then they expanded from that base.

 

[humble minion]

Tracy Hickman actively hated the whole Setting, too, which is a big reason that Curse of Strahd is a bit of a revoor...they worked with Hickman to make a vision of Rwvenloft that fit the original idea better...and then they expanded from that base.

I knew Hickman hated that Ravenloft nicked Soth from Dragonlance, but i didn't know he hated the entire setting.

It's interesting the dynamic though. Hickman is heavily involved in CoS, and CoS kinda expands Barovia to include EVERY possible Gothic horror trope - you've got werewolves, evil puppets, child-eating hags, fallen angels, twisted animal/human mutants, angsty flesh golems, etc etc etc. It looked to me at the time that CoS was all the Ravenloft we were ever going to get in 5e, so they had to cram everything into it, even stuff that would traditionally find a home in another domain.

Then VRGtR comes along, and expands the setting beyond a single domain again. Hickman is not in the credits there (outside of a mention where they talk about old products that provided inspiration), but several other authors who got their start in the old Ravenloft netbooks on the Kargatane or Fraternity of Shadows sites (which were heavily, heavily into the broader Core setting) were contributing authors.

Personally, I'd be very, very surprised if the future production of VRGtR was even considered a possibility at the time that CoS was written. All signs point towards it having been intended as a one-shot, and that WotC changed their minds (as they're perfectly entitled to do!) later on.

 

[Stormonu]

And this is why having hobby gamers in charge of DnD led to bankruptcy and having business people in charge has led to the largest growth of the hobby ever.

I prefer the latter thanks.

It can easily go the other way, I’ve seen what bean counters can do to a company. I think current D&D had been succeeding because initially the game designers had been flying under the business folk’s radar with just solid product. I’m afraid because it has lately been getting so big that the business side is interfering with the content and value of the creative side (Spelljammer being the low point). I want them to work in tandem, and not swing in one direction (soulless product for the sake of money churn and at the other end unrestrained creative design that costs more than it takes in or is too far out there to be appealing).