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

Spelljammer-ship-in-space-asteroid-city.jpeg

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.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I never read them, so it didn't affect me. Prior to the Disney buy out, the only Star Wars I was familiar with was the six films and the Clone Wars, which they coincidentally kept.

Also, the Extended Universe was never officially canon, like the current stuff is. Thus, I never treated it as such.

The Force suddenly being 'Midichlorians' in the prequels felt like a lore change to me,

Not to mention the whole 'Han shot first' was changed,
as was the fact that R2D2 could for some reason fly in the prequels.
etc...
 

log in or register to remove this ad

The Force suddenly being 'Midichlorians' in the prequels felt like a lore change to me,

Not to mention the whole 'Han shot first' was changed,
as was the fact that R2D2 could for some reason fly in the prequels.
etc...
None of that changed what happened before. That's the difference.

Edit: the Han shot first thing was an error in Lucas' part, understandably railed against. Mistakes happen.
 

mean how reoccurring do we define 'maybe girl' because I'd argue the most popular King Arthur at the moment is a certian Artoria from Fate
Where do you draw the line between 'inspired by Arthur' and 'different retelling of Arthur'? Don't know Artoria, but that sounds more like the former. If anything 'inspired by Arthur' gets lumped into 'still Arthur but different', then this is pretty much game over for everything ever, there are then millions of retellings of the same dozen or so original stories
 

Marvel and Star Trek have both made sincere effort to stick with the lore as much as possible. D&D has not.

Are you serious?

The movies barely follow any Marvel lore which has, in itself, been redone six ways from Sunday.

Or, to put it another way, who is Scarlet Witch’s father in the MCU movies? It’s a rather important bit of lore in the comics. As in the central theme of the character for decades.
 

Where do you draw the line between 'inspired by Arthur' and 'different retelling of Arthur'? Don't know Artoria, but that sounds more like the former. If anything 'inspired by Arthur' gets lumped into 'still Arthur but different', then this is pretty much game over for everything ever, there are then millions of retellings of the same dozen or so original stories
It's a thin, porous line, frankly.
 

Are you serious?

The movies barely follow any Marvel lore which has, in itself, been redone six ways from Sunday.

Or, to put it another way, who is Scarlet Witch’s father in the MCU movies? It’s a rather important bit of lore in the comics. As in the central theme of the character for decades.
The comics and the MCU are clearly different continuities. It's officially in a different universe.

As far as the comics go, Marvel (as opposed to its Distinguished Competition) has always made an effort to maintain their continuity as much as the reality of publishing a continuous story for decades allows. The past of universe 616 still happened, although parts of it are obviously in broad strokes.

The point is, they made an effort. D&D has no interest in doing so, and frankly I don't respect that.
 



It's a thin, porous line, frankly.
I am not disagreeing, just wondering ;) I guess I draw it much closer to the original, i.e. if you do not at a minimum have an Arthur in some version of a medieval setting, then it is only 'inspired by' (and yes, I know that you can shift the time too, see Romeo + Juliet with DiCaprio, but then you usually have the decency to stick close to the original in most other ways)
 


Related Articles

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top