D&D 4E 4e, Gleemax, and DDI info from GAMA Trade Show

[timbannock]

Speaking only for myself, I think it's a great idea.

I love the "limited release" model for campaign settings. (It's worked very well for White Wolf, for instance.) It's enough to give the basics of the setting, without hyper-detailing every little corner of the world--that, at least to me, is the perfect mix.

That said, there's no doubt whatsoever in my mind that the settings will see expansion, in DDI articles. And I'm also willing to bet that if the three books exceed sales expectations, WotC would probably at least consider expanding the lines down the road. But again, those are just guesses.

#1 place you'll see expansion material: DDI. Gives more reason for people to buy into that (for better or worse).

#2 place you'll see it: Adventures. The expedition series did at least moderately well (I'd say probably a bit better than that even), so that might be a good way for them to focus in on a certain key area, toss out some adventure ideas, and expand on this place, that place, this NPC, or that deity. Or whatever.

 

[amethal]

I wonder if most, if not all, of the crunch is going to be in the DM and Players books, with the setting book being mostly fluff.

That would mean I could pick up the setting books for my 3.5 campaigns without having to get a load of 4th edition rules I don't want. That would be fantasatic.

 

[pneumatik]

Monster Manuals

I'm curious if the monster manuals that come out each year (they're coming out with a MM each year, right?) will be geared toward the setting that's coming out the same year. It would free up even more space in the three setting books. It would also end up giving each expansion MM a theme, which would be helpful for people looking to run a particular type of game not directly based on one of the settings.

 

[Khairn]

Speaking only for myself, I think it's a great idea.

I love the "limited release" model for campaign settings. (It's worked very well for White Wolf, for instance.) It's enough to give the basics of the setting, without hyper-detailing every little corner of the world--that, at least to me, is the perfect mix.

That said, there's no doubt whatsoever in my mind that the settings will see expansion, in DDI articles. And I'm also willing to bet that if the three books exceed sales expectations, WotC would probably at least consider expanding the lines down the road. But again, those are just guesses.

As a big fan of many of those older settings I think this is great news. New "official" life for Spelljammer and Dark Sun will be fantastic!

I believe (opinion here) that the 3 book format is also a very smart business move for WotC, as it accomplishes a few key objectives ...
-limited financial exposure when introducing a new setting, (3 books to start) where sales of those books will be the key measurement when determing whether additional print content is warrented
-provides incentive for the fans of the setting to subscribe to the DDI, so they can get more setting specific content
-throws a bone to the many grognard fans of the old settings to get them excited about the new edition (if they aren't already)

I'd still prefer to see WotC develop a brand new setting that is designed to showcase 4E's design goals. Anytime you change a setting to a new system, there are going to be elements of that setting that will be dropped or significantly altered because of the change. Its bound to bring BMC's (b*tch, moan, complain) from some of the settings supporters. But that will be a thread for another day.

 

[Goobermunch]

I'm curious if the monster manuals that come out each year (they're coming out with a MM each year, right?) will be geared toward the setting that's coming out the same year. It would free up even more space in the three setting books. It would also end up giving each expansion MM a theme, which would be helpful for people looking to run a particular type of game not directly based on one of the settings.

I was just thinking the same thing. We've kind of seen it before. When the MM3 came out around the time Eberron came out and was chock full of new Eberron-esque monsters. Hopefully, they'll keep up the trend.

--G

 

[AllisterH]

To early to speculate on what campaign settings will be released?

Unfortunately, Eberron is coming right after Forgotten Realms but I would prefer a
"Standard/medieval/Eurocantric setting - Decidely non-standard Euorcentric setting - Standard"

It would keep games fresher over the long run I think.

So, for example, you go, FR - Darksun - Eberron - Spelljammer - Greyhawk - Planescape - Dragonlance - Al-Qadim - Birthright.

The MM manual for that year would be heavily based on those specific campaign settings (say 50% of the monsters are from those specific campaign settings, MM)

 

[Domon]

I gotta say, if they do update Dark Sun, I want to see some new Brom art. Who's with me?

totally seconded.

I'd still prefer to see WotC develop a brand new setting that is designed to showcase 4E's design goals.

that would be PoL, i hope. with a design philosopfy of "not detailling too much" like the world of Near...

 

[Ghaerdon Fain]

My worry is... has FR been rushed? Lot's of changes in those 100 years and so with us only having 3 books, seemingly rushed, that's it, other than DDI adventures and possibly small supplements... that is "it". In a small way I wish they did another setting first so they would get FR, really right.

I guess all we'll see this year is a FR blitz on DDI and then next year a blitz on Dark Sun etc... . I'm only really interested in FR so after the first year of DDI, who knows. DDI will have to spend the majority of their time supporting the new books. Books not everyone will be interested in.

Lets take this one step further. So if this is the case does that mean the Minis line will focus this year on FR? Next year on the other campaigns? And is this also true of the Tile line?

My two cents is like the rest of the opinions, the three book rule seems to be their sweet spot and all the rest is a promotion / hook for DDI. I used to get Dungeon and Dragon but stopped as I found the quality digress and lots of redundancies. Also there was too much advertising, maybe this isn't too bad a thing after all. What sucks for me is that I am prepared to get a 3 month subscription, or maybe even to January 09 just to see. I bet DDI will do well until the first quarter of '09. If its great good on WotC, if it's fluff... DOOM.

 

[Charwoman Gene]

Unfortunately, Eberron is coming right after Forgotten Realms but I would prefer a
"Standard/medieval/Eurocantric setting - Decidely non-standard Euorcentric setting - Standard"

So Ebberon is a standard European setting... interesting.

 

[Imaro]

If this is true (about the campaign settings) I may have just been sold on 4e. I have been a fan and proponent of White Wolf's model since they started with Promethean( which sadly wasn't my cup o' tea)...I have, however, bought all the Scion books, and while my group plays a year of Scion am purchasing the Changeling books for next years campaign. I have never liked the endless book model that D&D thrives off of and added with minis, dungeon tiles, etc. it has actually caused me to reach a point where I wasn't buying into their campaign settings at all. Now I just hope Planescape (even if it's a redone version) gets on that list. Not a fan of Spelljammer but definitely liked both Dark Sun and Ravenloft.

NOTE: Am I reading this wrong or are the Dragon and Dungeon articles no longer open to fan submissions? Could someone clarify that for me?