D&D General A Chart of D&D Campaign Worlds (v 3.0)

[Yora]

I probably wouldn't count every book on the Planes as a Planescape book. Even if it got a few pages on Sigil.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I probably wouldn't count every book on the Planes as a Planescape book. Even if it got a few pages on Sigil.

Well, I would argue that the Planescape setting isn't really "The Planes", it's Sigil. "The Planes" is core rules. So I wouldn't count things that visit the planes, but I would include visits to Sigil. A mention wouldn't be sufficient though, Sigil is namedropped quite often in 5e. But I notice the OP has included the 5e DMG, but not Descent into Avernus.

 

[WarDriveWorley]

Al-Qadim had some support in 3.5 (Dragon 315 had the Sha'ir and Dragon 321 had prestige classes specific to the setting). I know it's not much, but it's there.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Some of you are familiar with my chart of 5E books (I also have one for every edition that I posted a couple years ago, but they could use prettying-up to be comparable to the 5E one). With all of this talk of campaign settings, I thought I'd do a slightly different chart, to get a sense of setting support over the years.

I consider this a work in progress, mainly because I'm not sure I feel confident with the designations for each setting and each year. For instance, the difference between mid and dark range setting books - what I call "major supplement" and "full setting product," respectively. Sometimes major supplements are as or more significant than full setting supplements.

But this is how it looks now. You'll also note that I include a few other settings that almost seem like official settings - Kalamar, Golarion, and Midgard.

Anyhow, let me know if you have any questions or suggestions for revision. Again, this is a work in progress and just a bit of fun.

View attachment 156679

birthright was only in 2e? I thought it had some 3e support in Dragon and Dungeon magazines

 

[WarDriveWorley]

birthright was only in 2e? I thought it had some 3e support in Dragon and Dungeon magazines

WOTC did an online update for Birthright (and some others) for 3E (Other Worlds)

 

[Jer]

Well, I would argue that the Planescape setting isn't really "The Planes", it's Sigil. "The Planes" is core rules. So I wouldn't count things that visit the planes, but I would include visits to Sigil. A mention wouldn't be sufficient though, Sigil is namedropped quite often in 5e. But I notice the OP has included the 5e DMG, but not Descent into Avernus.

I would argue that Planescape isn't Sigil, but it also isn't "The Planes" either. Planescape involves a particular outlook and attitude towards the planes, the Factions, as well as how Sigil integrates into all of that. Sigil appears in the 4e DMG2, for example, but I don't think of that as Planescape - it's just a setting in the Outer Planes, because it doesn't have the attitude or tone of Planescape.

Because of that my argument is always that Planescape ended with the Faction War and anything that has come after isn't "Planescape" it's just "adventuring in the Outer Planes". Even if it happens in Sigil (for example, I wouldn't count Die Vecna Die as a Planescape product even though Sigil makes a major appearance in it).

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

A couple comments.

For one, I a struck by how some settings that loom large in our collective minds have actually had relatively short-lived, or sparse, support. Birthright stands out - just four years. And even Dark Sun, Eberron, and Planescape - they were really only significantly supported for five (Planescape), six (Eberron), and seven (Dark Sun) years at a time, with bits and pieces after.

I'm probably going to start a separate thread about this, given I am genuinely curious, but I wonder how common the view is that Birthright looms large in the collective D&D mind.

So all that is pending revision.

First, thank you. Please don't view what I am going to write as criticism, at all. Anytime someone chooses to take on a project like this, it's going to be a rough one ... no matter how much you know about all the settings, you won't know as much about any given setting as some person who has spent decades tending the Forgotten Realms wiki (for example). And fans of every setting will be pushing to have their settings get coded for more years (Hey, remember when there was an on-line mention by WoTC of my favorite setting in 2007? THAT COUNTS! PUT IT ON THE SCOREBOARD!!!!!).

So you have my sympathy, as well as my thanks for taking this on!

With that said, I would make the following recommendation and obsevations:

Recommendation: As Snarf, I am duty-bound to recommend that you put in some more rules or you will be facing madness. Especially when it comes to the "light" part- for example, I think you probably need to be clear that to qualify for a "light box," it has to be a published product that primarily, or mostly, takes place in the setting. A module, adventure, or other official published product that isn't a major campaign update or regional guide etc. (dark and medium).

And decide if you want to include Dragon Magazine. I'd say ... no. Or code it differently. Because once you include Dragon (and or other semi-official sources) you're going to go the direction of madness. IMO.

Observations:
1. Forgotten Realms did not exist in D&D until the Gray Box. Yes, Greenwood was in Dragon prior to that, but if you're including Dragon you're going to run into a lot of issues. You will end up with a lot of boxes shaded from the 70s through the 00s, and lose a lot of the value of your chart.

2. There are some curious omissions I noticed when going over this; for example, Kara Tur had a series of modules published from '86-'89 that you would want shaded in (the OA series).

Overall, though, this is excellent and clearly researched well. I appreciate that you even incorporated the "Greyhawk hole" from '94-'97 (although hardcore fans would argue that the AOL release of Ivid the Undying would count .... AOL......).

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I'm probably going to start a separate thread about this, given I am genuinely curious, but I wonder how common the view is that Birthright looms large in the collective D&D mind.

I want it to be true...

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

I want it to be true...

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I'm probably going to start a separate thread about this, given I am genuinely curious, but I wonder how common the view is that Birthright looms large in the collective D&D mind.

I saw it in the shop when it came out and went meh. I would put it on a par with Ghostwalk.