WotC Why WotC SHOULD Make A New Setting

CreamCloud0 · Mar 25, 2026

mamba said:
that only works if they make that their only setting going forward instead of adding it to the mix

They don’t have to throw out the old settings, new content can still be made for them too, but my intent was more for there to be a ‘primary core setting’ for any new content that isn’t being designed for an old setting is to be designed to orient into this new setting, or go with two settings in an either-or format where anything’s designed to fit one’s theme or the other’s,

ZeshinX · Mar 25, 2026

doctorbadwolf said:
I agree. New settings that showcase and explore different ways to play dnd, different ways to blend genres, different moods and themes that dnd can do, is a great way to get decades out of the same ruleset.

So thought TSR. It killed them. Well that and a whole lot of other foolishness.

Scott Christian · Mar 25, 2026

I agree. Make a new setting. Put some muscle into it. I really don't think many people disagree about wanting them to do it. The real question is: What would that setting be like? That is when the disagreement comes in.

doctorbadwolf · Mar 25, 2026

ZeshinX said:
So thought TSR. It killed them. Well that and a whole lot of other foolishness.

Not really. You are conflating an extreme scattershot of competing games that werent even co.latible with eachother, with having new settings that plug into the same core game.

ZeshinX · Mar 25, 2026

doctorbadwolf said:
Not really. You are conflating an extreme scattershot of competing games that werent even co.latible with eachother, with having new settings that plug into the same core game.

There were some that were that were incompatible, others that were, and ALL used the 2e core (I'm speaking of the 2e glut). Ultimately it seems we will disagree, and I'm good with that.

I'm just finding it interesting to see the genesis of history (potentially) repeat itself.

doctorbadwolf · Mar 25, 2026

ZeshinX said:
There were some that were that were incompatible, others that were, and ALL used the 2e core (I'm speaking of the 2e glut). Ultimately it seems we will disagree, and I'm good with that.

I'm just finding it interesting to see the genesis of history (potentially) repeat itself.

Alternity.

MichaelSomething · Mar 25, 2026

Scott Christian said:
I agree. Make a new setting. Put some muscle into it. I really don't think many people disagree about wanting them to do it. The real question is: What would that setting be like? That is when the disagreement comes in.

Would people still be for a new setting if it was filled with things they didn't like??

Steampunkette · Mar 25, 2026

Reynard said:
NO

YES

Good conducive talk, there!

More seriously: Anything they could put into a Steampunk Setting they can just put into Eberron with the faintest tweak. That is what I was saying. Not "Eberron is Steampunk".

Whizbang Dustyboots · Mar 25, 2026

ZeshinX said:
So thought TSR. It killed them. Well that and a whole lot of other foolishness.

tombowings · Mar 25, 2026

I'd love to see a setting that is designed for the current player-character lineup. I'm currently having a hard time imagining the place of many sub-classes in the game world (glamor bards, world tree barbarians), getting my head around race relations (why are monster PCs not attacked on sight?) and understanding how to represent the role magic system in world (what is a spell slot? How does the prevalence of magic--especially rituals--affect the living conditions and the economy?).

Questions like these have prevented me from running a game of D&D since 2014; instead, I have opted for other games I can better comprehend.