D&D 5E (2024) WotC Should Make 5.5E Specific Setting

[W'rkncacnter]

It's weird that no one wants evil orcs but we are going to do a draconic caste system based on scale color.

nobody said the kingdom was good aligned.

also i don't really have a problem with evil orcs so it's really funny that you used that as an example towards me specifically

 

[AlViking]

Sure. I don't think anyone wants a boring setting, except Greyhawk fans.*

I do not know.

*I kid! Pitchforks down.

Pitchforks are the least of your worries!

 

[Minigiant]

ok so im having trouble understanding what you mean here. every dragonborn color is a noble house...but then there's commoners who just wear brown? or do you mean the commoners have brown scales and "wear" is a typo

Dragonborn of colors of the official true dragons would be nobility.

• House Black
• House Brass
• House Bronze

etc

Commoner Dragonborn would be Brown

in either case i wonder if it'd be more interesting to split it by dragon type. so like maybe the metallics are the nobility and the chromatics commoners/warriors and gems are like the merchant and/or philosopher classes. or maybe the chromatics are a warrior nobility and the metallics commoners. just so commoners have a little more variety then brown

In my own setting, metallics are warrior nobility, chromatics are merchant nobles, and gems are science/psionic nobility of different countries.

Commoner Dragonborn are Brown or Iron colored.

And there is a ritual to partially or fully change color. Rather than uniforms, noble dragonborn color their armies' scales.

 

[SlyFlourish]

It's not an official setting, but I think @SlyFlourish 's City of Arches is built on the rules conceits of the 5e ecosystem.

From its design it is crafted so any combination of nature, nurture and heroic path are possible -- no matter how weird and offbeat they feel to us old timers.
The enemies are not purely evil, but shades of grey. The minimization of alignment in 5e is reflected in this choice.
There are dungeons, but there's also a stronger sense of urban play.

Yep! Being a setting with any weird species or background was part of the initial design concepts. It didn't matter if you were a shard-mind wickerman in the bar, there was probably a server there who was also a shardmind wickerman.

 

[Amphytrion]

I plan to include it in my Phandbox campaign (at this point more of a Sword Coast Sandbox, really), which I’ll finally be running soon! I’m going to have two different groups playing in the same sandbox on different days of the week (inspired partly by Critical Role’s multi-table approach to campaign 4), doing session 0 for the first group tomorrow evening and the second group Wednesday evening. If either of those groups ends up making their way to Red Larch and doesn’t get sidetracked by the attack on Nightstone on the way there from Phandalin, maybe I’ll end up using a lot of that material.

I've always wanted to do a Phandbox! I imagine you've combined Lost Mines and Icespire Peak, but what else have you put in? Stormwreck Isle? The 4e Neverwinter book?

(Sorry, I know this is a bit-off topic. Maybe the Phandbox can be our 5.5 setting?)

 

[Kobold Avenger]

I don't think they need to bend over backwards to explain why there's some classes or species changes brought on by Edition changes in the most generic of the D&D settings. Those settings it's easy to adapt things since they were by their nature, quite generic.

And what would be a 5e specific setting, beyond what they sort of had with Radiant Citadel?

 

[Reynard]

And what would be a 5e specific setting, beyond what they sort of had with Radiant Citadel?

It would be to 5.5E what Eberron was to 3.5E.

 

[Remathilis]

It would be to 5.5E what Eberron was to 3.5E.

Aside from better incorporating the new PHB species, what do you see that entailing?

 

[Reynard]

Aside from better incorporating the new PHB species, what do you see that entailing?

As I stated upthread, 5.5 moves some elements from species to background, and that could be represented in setting design in an interesting way. 5.5 is a looser ruleset than 3.5, so a lot of the "these are the effects of the magic item economy on the setting" we saw in Eberron aren't really applicable, but 5.5 does make some assumptions about the overall meta-setting so those can be incorporated.

Most importantly, embracing the current rules allows you to build a world that does not contradict the system, or create undo tension. That's the real goal.

 

[Parmandur]

As I stated upthread, 5.5 moves some elements from species to background, and that could be represented in setting design in an interesting way. 5.5 is a looser ruleset than 3.5, so a lot of the "these are the effects of the magic item economy on the setting" we saw in Eberron aren't really applicable, but 5.5 does make some assumptions about the overall meta-setting so those can be incorporated.

Most importantly, embracing the current rules allows you to build a world that does not contradict the system, or create undo tension. That's the real goal.

So in what ways does the Guildmasters Guide to Ravnica not do that...?