Another setting question

[doghead]

I have this question stuck in my head, and I can't dislodge it. Why is there no supported official default DnD setting?

I'm sure that there is a reason. Its probably financial - such a product is not seen as profitable. Fair enough. WotC is a business. If such is the situation, and I was in their shoes, I would make the same decision.

Perhaps there has been a statement on this matter which someone could share. Or perhaps there is a WotC staffer (I'm sure that there are some lurking around) who could explain. That would be shiny.

Still, it just seems odd. Wrong even.

So lets say, for the sake of argument, WotC decided that they wanted an official default setting. And they came to you and said, "Dude, we need an official default DnD setting, and you are the person to do it." What would you do? Assuming that you were willing to take the job.

Who knows, if someone has a really cool idea WotC may tap them on the shoulder and say "Dude ..."

And that would be shiny too.

doghead
aka thotd

 

[doghead]

Humm, I seem to be talking to myself. Again. Oh well, hopefully writing this will get it out of my system so I can get some sleep tonight.

My gaming experience started in HS with AD&D. At that time, I wasn't really bothered by the whole 'You are standing in front of a cave' type opening to adventures. I don't recall ever knowing anything about the world outside the module, nor caring much. By the time I came back to DnD, around the time that 3.5 was released, I wanted to know a little bit about the world I was about to dive into. By then, there were several settings around. But most of them represented fairly hefty investments of time and money. A lot of them were no longer supported. Nothing really fitted the bill for what I was looking for - something cheap and easy to pick up that I could use to give 3.5 a spin. I ended up brewing up something myself. It was very much a 'back of the envelope job', and the game suffered for that.

Keep it simple in order to keep the barriers to entry low. So, a fairly generic fantasy setting. Vanilla if you like. Vanilla is what most people know, and what most newcomers to DnD would expect. It doesn't require a lot of reading or effort to get up to speed. Anyone who has a passing idea about the fantasy genre should be able to grasp the basic concepts and jump right in. Of course, these are not hard to brew up for yourselves. If you have the time. And if you have enough experience. New players usually lack the latter. Many of us lack the former. Vanilla is also easily adaptable. A tweak here, a switch there - it shouldn't be hard to adapt to something more to the tastes of those using it.

It should also be fairly inexpensive. Which probably means .pdf products, perhaps with Print on Demand books for those who like to have something to hold on to. Some material may be available free on-line. The setting would cleave to the core rules. No additional material would be required, and no new material would be introduced for the setting. At least not officially. Gamers can add what they like.

As far as the products themselves go, I would be tempted to break it down into an overview of the world with expansions providing greater detail about various areas. The overview would including a 'world' map and general descriptions of nations, principle cities and people. I would be tempted to make this a collaborative effort, using something like the forums here. The 'world' should include a place for the most common fantasy concepts and genres - a place for pirate, Arabian, Oriental, etc style adventures. A GM should be able to find somewhere to plonk pretty much any of those old modules he has lying around. Additional supplements could be provided to elaborate on the different regions. A couple of bucks for the overview, and a few more for an expansion or two and you should be pretty much ready to play.

Rather than a world map set down on paper, I thought about using something like tiles. Each tile would represent a kingdom or region, and GM's could build a setting to suit themselves. The advantage is flexibility. For example, some people like the idea of having a goblin kingdom here, a dragon ruled kingdom there and so on. Others prefer a more historical feel with mostly human kingdoms. The disadvantage of using tiles is that it requires more work on the part of the GM, as well as the designers. Although, this could be eliminated somewhat by having a default arrangement of the tiles. GM's then have to option of re-arranging the tiles if they want to, but don't have to do so. It also increases the complexity of the setting somewhat. Descriptions of regions need to include a mechanism for adapting them for differing neighbours. Alternatively, each region could be completely self contained. But eliminating regional relationships would somewhat detract from the setting I think. Overall, I'm inclined to think the idea wouldn't fly.

doghead
aka thotd

 

[an_idol_mind]

I have this question stuck in my head, and I can't dislodge it. Why is there no supported official default DnD setting?

Technically, there is a default setting. Greyhawk is the default setting of 3rd edition, while 4th edition looks like it will have at least the beginnings of a default setting of its own.

I think, though, that a lot of D&D's success is tied to the fact that it's not intrinsically linked to one specific setting. Sure, there have always been references to Greyhawk and Blackmoor, but those links are tenuous at best. (For much of my gaming life, for example, I had no idea who Mordenkainen, Tenser, et al were. When I first read a Greyhawk setting book, I was amazed that those guys were actually part of the world and not just obscure references to great mages of the past.)

Without a detailed default setting, D&D is free to allow for two things: 1) selling setting books for many different campaign settings, and 2) allowing DMs to create their own settings. Both options show of the flexibility of the system, and also allow people to toss out parts of the game they don't like. If you prefer a magic-poor, desolate world, there's Dark Sun. If you want pulp adventure and weird magic everywhere, there's Eberron. If you want something totally different, you can do your own thing.

Not having a default setting also allows for a broader appeal to gamers who like the rules but don't like the available campaign settings. As an example of what I mean, some of my friends have suggested that I look into the Exalted RPG. One of the big stumbling points for me and the reason I haven't bought the game yet is because the rules seem very tied to a setting -- a setting that I'm not sure I want to use. If I could get the rules without the setting, I'd be more likely to have an interest in Exalted.

So lets say, for the sake of argument, WotC decided that they wanted an official default setting. And they came to you and said, "Dude, we need an official default DnD setting, and you are the person to do it." What would you do? Assuming that you were willing to take the job.

I'd start small. Present something like Karameikos (one of the first pieces of the Mystara setting) or Thunder Rift (an isolated valley ideal for low-level adventuring) in the DM's Guide. That would give beginners a base, while allowing for experienced players and DMs to take things in their own direction. One of the great appeals of D&D is its flexibility and wide range, and I wouldn't want to do anything at all to impede that.

 

[doghead]

Technically, there is a default setting. Greyhawk is the default setting of 3rd edition, while 4th edition looks like it will have at least the beginnings of a default setting of its own.

Thats what I understand. But Greyhawk doesn't seem to be currently supported.

Without a detailed default setting, D&D is free to allow for two things: 1) selling setting books for many different campaign settings, and 2) allowing DMs to create their own settings.

My thoughts were based on the premise that DnD would keep its other campaign settings. The default setting should compliment rather than detract from the product range. I tend to agree that the freedom to make new and varied settings for the game is one of its strengths. It can be frustrating though, when a setting falls by the wayside, making it harder to get.

 

[Glyfair]

Why is there no supported official default DnD setting?

Because the "official default D&D setting" is really a handful of assumptions about such a setting that DMs would use to create their own homebrew game. This was true pretty much throughout the game.

OD&D's default setting was undefined. The only thing that was really close to a definition was that is used the map from Outdoor Survival.

AD&D's default setting was Greyhawk because Gary spread all sorts of colorful names into the books. When Gary finally ended up publishing the setting a few years later it wasn't even the real "Greyhawk." It was a version that was designed to differ from Gary & Rob's setting for two reasons. Gary was pretty protective of his setting and Gary wanted DMs to have room to create their own settings based on the maps and outlines in the product.

2E's default setting was again, undefined. This is sort of a weird area since TSR was supporting a dozen or more official settings.

3E's setting was Greyhawk, again (as was 3.5, in a slightly lesser fashion). Except for one book, the core books just used the names and ideas from Greyhawk to give color to the "generic" products, without necessarily tying them to a specific setting. Yes, the grognards knew about the existing Greyhawk, but a new DM or player could still use the Greyhawk stuff as a homebrew without knowing about the existing Greyhawk.

 

[jdrakeh]

It can be frustrating though, when a setting falls by the wayside, making it harder to get.

Not for me. I've been collecting RPG books for quite some time and have noticed that setting books rarely appreciate in value. I've also found that there will always be at least one crazy douchebag fan trying to sell something like FR1 for $200. If you ignore that guy and learn a little bit of patience, you can do as I did and grab stuff like:

• The FR 1e Box Set and All Accompanying Modules: $40.00 US
• The ENTIRE Scarred Lands product line: $235.00 US
• Not having to deal with Crazy Fan Guy: Priceless

 

[Glyfair]

Not for me. I've been collecting RPG books for quite some time and have noticed that setting books rarely appreciate in value.

They typically don't until I decide I want it. The First Fantasy Campaign was going for the same price as most Judges Guild products on eBay until I decided I wanted it, then the prices skyrocketed.

 

[jdrakeh]

They typically don't until I decide I want it. The First Fantasy Campaign was going for the same price as most Judges Guild products on eBay until I decided I wanted it, then the prices skyrocketed.

eBay is always the very last resport for me. I usually go from Noble Knight Games to Amazon to Bartertown to ENWorld forums to eBay.