Wizards of the Coast Is Hiring a D&D Worldbuilder

Wizards of the Coast is looking to hire someone to build new worlds for Dungeons & Dragons. Over the weekend, Wizards of the Coast posted a new job listing for a "Senior Narrative Worldbuilding Designer for Dungeons & Dragons." The new position will help Wizards of the Coast "create exciting and inspirational new settings" alongside developing existing settings. Notably, this isn't a position limited to the D&D RPG design team - the position will also work with "ensuring narrative consistency" across video games, entertainment and the D&D RPG.

At a press event earlier this year, D&D franchise head Jess Lanzillo mentioned that new campaign settings were potentially on the way. "With Jeremy Crawford taking on the game director role and then Chris Perkins taking on the creative director role is that we were able to really reestablish a world building environment," Lanzillo said. "What does that mean? We can really establish our worlds and settings like the Forgotten Realms and also look to creating new ones again. That's something that we are working on and we don't have anything to really discuss today other than to tell you like we are re-establishing everything that we have and we are going to make some new stuff too."

The full job listing is below:

We are hiring a Senior Narrative Worldbuilding Designer for Dungeons & Dragons. In this role, you will create exciting and inspirational new settings and develop existing ones. The settings you create will become part of our ever-expanding multiverse. Working closely with others in our creative team, you will give life to legendary characters, intertwine the narratives of D&D stories across various platforms, and provide new content for internal and external partners to play with across all expressions of D&D. We need a world builder with strong writing skills, a collaborative spirit, and a focused imagination.

What You'll Do:

• Build and develop comprehensive narrative worldbuilding materials for the D&D franchise
• Design and flesh out new worlds, locations, and settings within the D&D multiverse
• Evolve and expand existing D&D settings through compelling narrative development
• Build and develop franchise-level characters, factions, and storylines
• Ensure narrative consistency across the franchise portfolio including video games, entertainment, and the RPG
• Collaborate with cross-functional teams to align worldbuilding elements across different media
• Develop detailed lore documentation and creative briefs for our fans, partners, and team members.
• Lead narrative development for our world bibles and style guides

 

[Parmandur]

I ... don't think so here, personally. I don't read it that way.

The line

Evolve and expand existing D&D settings through compelling narrative development

To me doesn't say 'metaplot designer', it says 'person who knows lore inside out and can mine if for bits and pieces we can use in modern-style narrative products, while without being so wedded to it that they'll get annoyed when we, for example, use Lord Soth's name and image in SotDQ because he;s an iconic character, but throw out all the actual character traits that made him interesting'.

When you want a place in Faerun that has properties X, Y and Z for an upcoming campaign book, then this person will put up their hands and say 'Durpar!' or whatever. They'll be the ones whose job it'll be to find an approximately lore-adjacent excuse to squeeze harengon somehow into a hypothetical new Dark Sun book, for instance, or to remember an obscure magic weapon from an old 2e FR soufrcebook that can be dropped into a new product as an easter egg.

Sooooo, thw one responsible for using the game lore as a malleable game tool, as intended...?

 

[cranberry]

I thought the multiverse solved the lore difference issues. Also, isn't there a spell that allows you to travel between worlds/settings such as Plane shift? (I thought there was anaother one, but I can't think of it)

 

[michaeljpastor]

I think, from some recent interviews (Mike Mearls in particular) book dependency is the bad thing not lore or metaplot per se.
If you sell a book that requires a setting book, then the sales of that book will be hurt by the dependency. The same if there is too much dependency in movies or TV series.

I recall that Ray Winninger was the one who pointed out the book dependency issue (mmearls may have too, but I don't recall it).

Comic books have the same kind of problem, which is why they reboot them at #1 so often.

In both cases, I just wonder if the quality of the products is what drives the decline, as opposed to the dependency issues. I just don't think there's enough data to draw any conclusion.

 

[Henadic Theologian]

That is objectively not true since there are 2nd edition lines that have not been reprinted such as Dark Sun & Birthright, Mystara.

I personally think Mystara will be next classic setting updated, in it's day it was very popular and highly supported.

And it got a chapter in Worlds & Realms, unlike Birthright or Darksun. I think they want to retool their approach to D&D war gaming before they do Birthright again.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

That is objectively not true since there are 2nd edition lines that have not been reprinted such as Dark Sun & Birthright, Mystara.

I beg to differ. 5e may not have those 3, but 2e did not have Eberron, Exandria, Theres, or Ravnuca.

"Objectively" 5e already has more settings than 2e.

Is it missing some good ones? Sure! I'd love to see the three you mention.

If you do too, maybe don't argue with my post where I explain why it's okay for 5e to have more settings, and that it's not the number of settings that killed 2e. It was competing lines of product. (The boxed sets, as mentioned, were part of that).

 

[Henadic Theologian]

I beg to differ. 5e may not have those 3, but 2e did not have Eberron, Exandria, Theres, or Ravnuca.

"Objectively" 5e already has more settings than 2e.

Is it missing some good ones? Sure! I'd love to see the three you mention.

If you do too, maybe don't argue with my post where I explain why it's okay for 5e to have more settings, and that it's not the number of settings that killed 2e. It was competing lines of product. (The boxed sets, as mentioned, were part of that).

Okay let's count

2e

1. Forgotten Realms
2. Dragonlance
3. Darksun
4. Planescape
5. Spelljammer
6. Mystara
7. Birthright
8. Ravenloft
9. Greyhawk
10. Jakandor
11. Lankhmar
12. Diablo (if we include MtG settings we got to include this)
13. Council of Wyrms

5e/5.5e

1. Forgotten Realms
2. Dragonlance
3. Ravenloft
4. Eberron
5. Radiant Citadel
6. Greyhawk
7. Planescape
8. Spelljammer
9. Theros
10. Ravnica
11. Strixhaven/Arcvios
12. Exandria

So no 2e had more settings, you forgot to include a few of the less famous minor ones.

But it's getting vary close and if Tarkir comes out this year, it will be tied and then very likely 5e/5.5e will surpass 2e next year.

Dor some reason unlike Radiant Citadel, WotC does not consider Witchlight/Domains of Delight as a setting or it would be tied.

 

[Dire Bare]

Okay let's count

2e

1. Forgotten Realms
2. Dragonlance
3. Darksun
4. Planescape
5. Spelljammer
6. Mystara
7. Birthright
8. Ravenloft
9. Greyhawk
10. Jakandor
11. Lankhmar
12. Diablo (if we include MtG settings we got to include this)
13. Council of Wyrms

5e/5.5e

1. Forgotten Realms
2. Dragonlance
3. Ravenloft
4. Eberron
5. Radiant Citadel
6. Greyhawk
7. Planescape
8. Spelljammer
9. Theros
10. Ravnica
11. Strixhaven/Arcvios
12. Exandria

So no 2e had more settings, you forgot to include a few of the less famous minor ones.

But it's getting vary close and if Tarkir comes out this year, it will be tied and then very likely 5e/5.5e will surpass 2e next year.

Dor some reason unlike Radiant Citadel, WotC does not consider Witchlight/Domains of Delight as a setting or it would be tied.

Kinda missing the point by being pedantic, are we?

Which edition had more settings, 2E or 5E, depends on how you count . . . but the actual point still stands. 5E has published a lot of settings and it hasn't killed the game. The "common wisdom" that too many settings killed 2E is false, it was too many competing product lines that did the game (and the company) in.

In 5E, we got one or two books per setting. In 2E we got entire product lines.

 

[Henadic Theologian]

Kinda missing the point by being pedantic, are we?

Which edition had more settings, 2E or 5E, depends on how you count . . . but the actual point still stands. 5E has published a lot of settings and it hasn't killed the game. The "common wisdom" that too many settings killed 2E is false, it was too many competing product lines that did the game (and the company) in.

In 5E, we got one or two books per setting. In 2E we got entire product lines.

Oh I agree it hasn't killed anything, I just did the count for fun and curiosity.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Oh I agree it hasn't killed anything, I just did the count for fun and curiosity.

I really, really, really, don't want to get into this silly oneupmanship with you, but if you're going to include micro-settings from 2e, you're going to find that there are several of those in 5e as well. But whatever. Pedant your way to victory if it means so much to you. As @Dire Bare points out, none of this silliness was my point, anyhow.

 

[Henadic Theologian]

I really, really, really, don't want to get into this silly oneupmanship with you, but if you're going to include micro-settings from 2e, you're going to find that there are several of those in 5e as well. But whatever. Pedant your way to victory if it means so much to you. As @Dire Bare points out, none of this silliness was my point, anyhow.

What victory? I'm not on a side, again I just made the list out of curiosity.

What micro settings did I miss for 5e?