Dorian_Grey
First Post
I voted no, mostly because I feel that with the core books, APs set in the realms, and the SCAG that the realms is pretty fully covered. Further, as they continue down the path of new APs, then things could radically change in the realms: "Oh! Waterdeep gets destroyed!" which makes the setting book outdated.
In addition to that, in general I feel campaign setting guides are not needed (and I'd feel that way even if they announced Mystara was coming back, which was my favorite setting). What I'd rather they do is what they did for the Magic: The Gathering settings that they converted to 5e. Quick, free and high level - give me some flavor and let me do the rest. I'm actually preparing an Innistrad campaign because it was a perfect tool for inspiring a story for my players!
From a marketing perspective it works as well. A few high quality free campaign sourcebooks which give enough to salivate will also drive core book sales. Keep them short and sweet, and it isn't a large investment in resources, but could pay out large dividends later. This is where I think TSR failed with 2nd Edition (though, again, it was my favorite - not trying to start a flame war!). They took the right approach with Karameikos, but by then it was to late. The large and heavy Dark Sun/Dragonlance/FR material was to heavy to maintain - each would require a dedicated staff to monitor all the lore and maintain the story bible. A dedicated staff that WotC currently doesn't have.
Now what are the advantages of the free - and VERY short - sourcebooks?
Anyway, that's why I voted no. Not because I'm coming down on the realms, but because I think that setting guides just aren't what WotC should be spending their limited time and resources on pursuing. They should be spending their resources on expanding their market, and short free setting books would be a great way to do so.
In addition to that, in general I feel campaign setting guides are not needed (and I'd feel that way even if they announced Mystara was coming back, which was my favorite setting). What I'd rather they do is what they did for the Magic: The Gathering settings that they converted to 5e. Quick, free and high level - give me some flavor and let me do the rest. I'm actually preparing an Innistrad campaign because it was a perfect tool for inspiring a story for my players!
From a marketing perspective it works as well. A few high quality free campaign sourcebooks which give enough to salivate will also drive core book sales. Keep them short and sweet, and it isn't a large investment in resources, but could pay out large dividends later. This is where I think TSR failed with 2nd Edition (though, again, it was my favorite - not trying to start a flame war!). They took the right approach with Karameikos, but by then it was to late. The large and heavy Dark Sun/Dragonlance/FR material was to heavy to maintain - each would require a dedicated staff to monitor all the lore and maintain the story bible. A dedicated staff that WotC currently doesn't have.
Now what are the advantages of the free - and VERY short - sourcebooks?
- Provides inspiration to players and DMs, maybe some light add ons like a subrace or subclass
- Gives an "official" setting for hardcore setting fans, might encourage them to come back if they haven't already.
- Affordable. 20 or so pages of a quick whistlestop tour in PDF format is much less costly then 180 pages in hardcover with distribution.
- Encourages core book purchases by allowing those interested to dip their toes in before purchasing.
- Can be combined with UA to further maintain long term market engagement
Anyway, that's why I voted no. Not because I'm coming down on the realms, but because I think that setting guides just aren't what WotC should be spending their limited time and resources on pursuing. They should be spending their resources on expanding their market, and short free setting books would be a great way to do so.