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


log in or register to remove this ad

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)
I mean, having Arthur in a "Medieval" setting is already wildly anachronistic. About as much as giving him a powdered wig under a trifold hat leading a battalion of musketeers would be.
 



Different editions of D&D are clearly different continuities.
They are now, anyway. Up until that declaration a few years ago, anyone following the Realms from 1E to 5E would reasonably assume it's all the same canon (complete with crisis events to mark edition changes). Other settings largely continued the same canon from 1E to 3E (and early 5E suggested that 4E-era reboots had been rolled back).
 


I believe the comics verse is still 616. Did they change that?
The comic universe is still 616, yeah. But Multiverse of Madness also called the MCU 616. Later, Across the Spider-Verse had Spidey 2099 refer to it as Earth-199999, as Marvel reference books had named it, in a nod to Spider-Man: No Way Home.
 

I mean, having Arthur in a "Medieval" setting is already wildly anachronistic. About as much as giving him a powdered wig under a trifold hat leading a battalion of musketeers would be.
I agree, it is, but at least most of the ones I have seen do, and as far as I can tell it kinda matches what most understand as Arthur today (and for the last few hundred years)
 



Related Articles

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top