Chris Perkins: Reintroducing Settings in Ways that Surprise People

WotC's D&D Story Manager, Chris Perkins, was the subject of an interview by a chap called Chris "Wacksteven" Iannitti. One of the topics covered is campaign setting books; Perkins says that they want to reintroduce settings in "surprising" ways, and that they're not guaranteed to be books. (thanks to Mistwell for the scoop)

The video is below, but if you can't watch it right now, here are the highlights as listed by pukunui on WotC's website:

• He can't talk about products that haven't been announced yet
• They value all of their worlds, as each one has "tons of fans"
• They are focusing on specific areas within settings to detail and "codify" via their story bibles
• Their goal is to "challenge people's expectations" re: sourcebooks
• They're "not interested in releasing books for the sake of releasing books anymore"
• They want book releases to be events that will "surprise and delight people"; they also want to put out books that people will actually use rather than books that will just get put on a shelf to "stay there and slowly rot"
• "One of our creative challenges is to package [setting] material - reintroduce facts and important details about our worlds - in a way that we know that DMs and players are going to use, that's going to excite them, that's actually going to surprise them. We may get that content out, but I'm not going to guarantee it's going to be a book. I'm not going to guarantee that it's going to be anything that you've seen before. But it will be something."

[video=youtube;alnwC34qUFs]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=alnwC34qUFs&feature=youtu.be[/video]
​

 

[DEFCON 1]

Haven't any one of you noticed as you've read through this thread that PRACTICALLY EVERY SINGLE ONE OF YOU WANTS SOMETHING DIFFERENT?

That's EXACTLY why WotC isn't going whole-hog on anything right now. Because nobody is looking for the same darned thing! ANYTHING they announce will get 10% of the people here exclaiming "Thank God! They're finally listening to us!", while the other 90% will shout "This company is full of it! Don't they know this thing is absolutely worthless?!?"

One of you wants intricate details of every single piece of the Realms in every single location that has changed following The Sundering. Another one of you wants a dozen pages of one area along with 57 adventure ideas. Another one of you wants that same thing except wants the monster stats included so you don't have to buy or open your Monster Manual. A person over here is happy the events of The Spellplague are not being "completely wiped away", a person over there wants a Realms that is a mirror image of the Grey Box. This guy wants the old Volo's Guides reprinted in paper form with most of the cool information left intact, but only some slight changes to account for the most up-to-date info. That girl wants the Volo's Guides re-done, but only in PDF form because doesn't WotC know this is an online world, and she doesn't want to have to carry her books with her wherever she goes. Over here is the player who is glad the adventure book is generic enough that she can take what she wants out of it and transplant it in the setting of her choice. Over there is the guy who feels it isn't generic ENOUGH, and is mad that he'll have to spend an extra hour of his time wiping away the names of places that don't fit where he's using it. And way over there is the person who doesn't want it *generic*... if it's a Forgotten Realms book, then include really useful Forgotten Realms setting details in it! What a shame that this guy here *also* wants that, but unfortunately what HE thinks are "useful Forgotten Realms setting details" are completely different than what the first guy though were "useful Forgotten Realms setting details".

It's ridiculous. No matter what WotC does or doesn't do, no one is ever going to be happy. And it's for that reason that they are well within their right (and probably completely correct) in ignoring ALL OF US... and just do what they feel like doing and what they think is right.

Because there's NO right answer. None. All they have is what they can feel proud of making at their end of the business working day.

 

[Schmoe]

I have meetings where a six-month software project is hashed out, designed, planned, and resourced. Meetings are not inherently evil things! I can imagine creative teams such as Wizards' get a lot out of sharing ideas around the table as well.

I'm not saying meetings are inherently evil. Meetings can serve a lot of purpose and can be very useful. Most of my job consists of communication, leadership, and meetings! But 5+ hours every single day of cross-functional meetings is a sign of a poorly functioning organization. There are much better ways to do things, including informal face-to-face discussions, phone calls, working groups, etc. I typically find that when you start defining the purpose and agenda for each meeting, and only including people that are really needed to fulfill the purpose, the number and length of meetings starts shrinking. Also, maybe it's a matter of terminology, but I wouldn't consider a working group to be a meeting, as long as people are actually working when they get together and not just reviewing status.

 

[Queer Venger]

Its funny you write this Defcon. I migrated to EN World after noting this kind of sentiment at the Wizard's D&D forums. But what Im noting is that this is creeping into EN World as well. Its hard to get excited for something when someone comes along and threadcraps on your enthusiasm. Im returning to D&D with 5e, and I see this more commonly reflected on forums, maybe some folks feel safe venting their hatred with the anonymity of the internet.
Conversely, at my FLGS, there is nothing but love and admiration for 5e and attracting more players to encounters night than ever before. Maybe some people just want to hate.

Chris Perkins, who is a great ambassador for D&D is promising us big things, yet some folk want to piss on it, maybe because 5e is not reproducing the failures of editions past. Because Wizards is trying a new model, a different approach and some people want the comfort of the familiar, even if it fails. D&D is a big brand, the biggest brand of fantasy rpg, the most known, and they want to do it right, yet people are not letting it. Im optimistic and hopeful, and some fine folk on these boards are too.

 

[DEFCON 1]

See, I don't mind if people talk about what they'd like to see WotC do. That's cool. We all have wish lists of stuff we'd like to see. What irritates the piss out of me though are those people who insinuate (or even outright SAY) that WotC is STUPID for not doing it. That they're a lousy company who just "don't get it". As though what THEY wanted was what EVERYBODY wanted. Because that isn't true. Not in the least. And this thread just proves it.

Say what you'd like to see? Great! Constantly calling Hasbro / WotC / D&D idiots, for not agreeing with you and then wasting all of our time by threatening to "take your money elsewhere" to a company that "cares about their customers"? Please. Just get over yourself.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

I'm not saying meetings are inherently evil. Meetings can serve a lot of purpose and can be very useful. Most of my job consists of communication, leadership, and meetings! But 5+ hours every single day of cross-functional meetings is a sign of a poorly functioning organization. There are much better ways to do things, including informal face-to-face discussions, phone calls, working groups, etc. I typically find that when you start defining the purpose and agenda for each meeting, and only including people that are really needed to fulfill the purpose, the number and length of meetings starts shrinking. Also, maybe it's a matter of terminology, but I wouldn't consider a working group to be a meeting, as long as people are actually working when they get together and not just reviewing status.

In my company, all of the above (bolded) would be described as "meetings."

 

[DMZ2112]

Haven't any one of you noticed as you've read through this thread that PRACTICALLY EVERY SINGLE ONE OF YOU WANTS SOMETHING DIFFERENT?

...Which is why I say:

I agree... for a Forgotten Realms Gazetteer. Which this is not. This is an adventure.

Well, we'd better learn to compromise, because guess what? When it comes to books, we're getting one kind: adventure paths. Personally, I'd prefer it if those paths had something for everyone.

 

[Hussar]

interesting.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

WoTC may never get another cent from me, save replacing core books in the event of disaster. Seems like we are both cool with that.

 

[Barantor]

I think it makes sense. They have sold CS in the past and I don't know how well they did overall. Usually it is just a DM that needs it, so maybe 1 in 5 people really wanting the book.

The majority of the information is in wikis now and they have the old books where big sections of the world haven't changed a bit, some since 3rd edition.

Small updates or even a free pdf booklet to bring the setting up to speed might be all they need. I found everything I needed for Mt Hotenow, Neverwinter and the Northern Sword Coast on the FR wiki.

I do hope they make adventure paths in other settings sooner rather than later. I realize FR is the most popular, but there are lots of folks that like Greyhawk, Dragonlance, Mystara and Spelljammer too.

 

[graves3141]

So, I finally had time to listen to the whole interview. Perkins should be a politician because he talks with words without ever saying anything definite (I know he can't talk about a product that hasn't been announced, he said it in the interview).

What I got out of the interview is that setting books as we have known them are gone. WotC isn't going to make a book or boxed set of just setting material like the 2E FR boxed set or the 3E FRCS, it's just not going to happen with 5E (which, is a real letdown for me to put it mildly).

Instead, it sounds like they are going to bring back small sections of campaign settings via the APs. Originally, WotC talked about having two books for each AP... one for the player, which will end up having new races and spells and probably some setting specific info kind of like how the "Player's Guide to Faerun, Player's Guide to Eberron, etc... do it." The other AP book will have the adventure in it (obviously) but hopefully done in such a way that it also gives you info on a particular region of the campaign world where the adventure takes place. That's sort of what PotA already does in my opinion, it gives you an adventure in a sandbox format so it's also sort of like a regional sourcebook too.

I guess this might work out alright but I'd still prefer to have one book dedicated to just setting/world information like the 3E FRCS.

And the guy giving the interview seemed way out of his league. Made me wonder if Perkins was the first person he'd ever interviewed.