D&D General Why Enworld should liberate D&D from Hasbro

[Stormonu]

It seems obvious to me.

Remember that the flood of creative settings from TSR back in the day were part of a business model that failed. Having the flagship company produce and solidly support multiple setting lines didn't work. So, WotC isn't going to repeat that pattern.

But they still hold the IPs. So, a few lightweight, one-off products to get folks started in something they might like is fine. But they aren't committing to significant long-term support of any of them.

While those 2E campaign worlds may have "failed" because TSR went too far into the weeds with product, to me the basic idea was sound - show the flexibility of the system and give examples of some of the wild and non-standard worlds you put in front of the players. That creativity feels missing in WotC's current "thrive on nostalgia" binge they've been doing.

Look at Daggerheart - the core rulebook has a couple pages on a half-dozen distinctive campaign seeds. I'd like to see more of that; maybe even a book that's a compilation of five to ten page treatment of NEW campaign worlds (and map) for the DM & players to further develop. Throw in quarter-page outlines for adventures for that world (so you get at least four adventure outlines on a page), like you find in the Greyhawk set and let the DM flesh them out rather than burn a whole chapter or half a book on something a fraction might use. If people latch on to one of those new worlds as favorite, WotC could develop it further. They sort of did that with Radiant Citadel, I think they could do more worlds and genres, rather than stuffing everything they can into FR.

If WotC's research shows that people use their own homebrew worlds more than published ones, I think giving their customers the seeds to then flesh out their own world makes far greater sense than retread "the classics" that everyone is going to complain they're doing wrong.

 

[Gradine]

I am in that tiny 40+ age bracket and I am also firmly within the target market for what D&D has been outputting for years. Tasha's in particular was one of my favorite books, and I love the changes to 2024.

 

[Umbran]

While those 2E campaign worlds may have "failed" because TSR went too far into the weeds with product, to me the basic idea was sound - show the flexibility of the system and give examples of some of the wild and non-standard worlds you put in front of the players.

But, that wasn't the idea of the era. Those were not "examples" or "seeds" or 10-page treatments.

And, while some of the current works have been rehashes, maybe you missed some of the point to some of them. Ghosts of Saltmarsh isn't just a rehash of three old modules - it is also a source of naval rules for the game overall. Shadow of the Dragon Queen isn't just a smidgen of Dragonlance - it's experimenting with attaching an actual wargame to your ttrpg to handle mass combat.

I'd like to see more of that; maybe even a book that's a compilation of five to ten page treatment of NEW campaign worlds (and map) for the DM & players to further develop.

Looks at Radiant Citadel.
Looks back at Stormonu.
shrugs

 

[Zardnaar]

I am in that tiny 40+ age bracket and I am also firmly within the target market for what D&D has been outputting for years. Tasha's in particular was one of my favorite books, and I love the changes to 2024.

Your views not universal and BG3 doing as well as it did proves there's a market for more mature content.

Available evidence also suggest the post Tashas books did not sell as well as pre Tashas books at least individually.
I'm not saying WotC change gears to more mature content just increase it from 0% to some.

I think we may be in that process already. We've gone from we're never doing Darksun to expecting it next year.

If they pull a Spelljammer/Dragonlance/Planescape there will be more moaning. I'm expecting something more like the 4E take vs 2E myself but we will see how far they go.

ENworld. Dark edgy content there's no market for that. My preferences rule.

BG3 hold my beer 1 billion in sales in 3 months or so.

 

[Gradine]

BG3 may have plenty of mature content but it is neither particularly dark nor edgy, like the people who love BG3 are the people who love the queer cheerful artwork.

 

[Zardnaar]

BG3 may have plenty of mature content but it is neither particularly dark nor edgy, like the people who love BG3 are the people who love the queer cheerful artwork.

Kinda. I think it appeals to everyone to some extent.

Dont like XYZ just dont engage with it.

There are things in it WotC kinda purged from tbe game specifically slavery, mind control/consent issues.

Dig deep enough there's worse.

Last seen in D&D late 3.5 obscure splat books and early Pathfinder.

Its also funny hanging out elsewhere. BG3 characters have there own erm sexy party time fan clubs. Often prefaced by Im not gay/straight but I would.....

Who hasn't climbed Mount Halsin to quote Shadowheart?

 

[bedir than]

WotC kinda purged from tbe game specifically slavery, mind control/consent issues.

Stares at the multitude of 5e books that contain those subjects wondering who published them if not the publisher listed on the book

 

[Zardnaar]

Stares at the multitude of 5e books that contain those subjects wondering who published them if not the publisher listed on the book

Different vibes though. BG3 goes a but further.

As I said its more similar to 3.5 and early Pathfinder in tone.

 

[Azzy]

Your views not universal and BG3 doing as well as it did proves there's a market for more mature content.

That's kinda what 3PP are there for (amongst many other things). 3PP can do things that WotC doesn't want to touch for one reason or another.

 

[Scribe]

ENworld. Dark edgy content there's no market for that.

Nobody actually believes that. Anyone rhat claims that is just gaslighting for their soft and safe twee D&D preference.