Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dykstrav" data-source="post: 5661244" data-attributes="member: 40522">I don't know. If it was well-written and gave individual groups of PCs a chance to be heroes without tying them to existing NPCs or events, sure. But then again... That sort of defeats the purpose. If you're going to do something new in a classic setting and ignore (or largely ignore) what has come before, why not make a new setting from the ground up? The fans of the classic setting get to enjoy the setting they like and everyone else gets a chance to stretch their legs a bit.The more I think about it, the more I believe that 3.5 Dungeons & Dragon's Eberron setting and Pathfinder's Golarion setting were so well-received is because they were new. Sure, there are halflings and dragons and the basic good-versus-evil dichotomies in the pantheon and other tropes of the genre, but they didn't have decades of lore and powerful NPCs to dominate the player's concepts of what the setting can or should be. There's a lot to be said about getting in on a new setting from the ground up. New setting have a certain charm, and being one of the first people to play it carries a sort of geek credibility. I know of several players who can fondly recall where and when they purchased their copy of Forgotten Realm's "old grey box" or the original Dragonlance adventures. You don't get the same sense of investment in the setting from players who came in to the Forgotten Realms or Dragonlance settings in the late nineties.Sorry that I'm rambling a bit... In short, new settings are pretty damned cool. I loved all the settings published in the 2E era, although I never played all of them. I'll always come back to the classics, but I want to see new stuff too.</blockquote>

Verification