Philotomy Jurament
First Post
Geoffrey said:
Yeah, I agree.
Every Edition Has Its Setting
- Thread starter airwalkrr
- Start date
Yeah, I agree.
wingsandsword
Legend
Tying a setting to a specific edition is nostalgia. Settings and rules are two separate things, and if you only had ever played Greyhawk using something completely different, like GURPS, after years of GURPS Greyhawk going to AD&D might even feel bizarre and like it wasn't meant to be played in that system.
Saying a new setting wouldn't work because older editions didn't have, before that setting was released and the new "crunch" to go with it, that setting wouldn't work in the current edition either. You could run Eberron just fine in 1e AD&D, or Basic D&D, with just as much custom rules as it took for 3.5, creating some custom races and classes and maybe a few more "fiddly bits".
I used to play and run Forgotten Realms in 2e, now I can do so as easily or better in 3e. Forgotten Realms was originally a 1st Edition setting, by the way. It was released in the twilight of 1e and became much bigger in 2e, but it was originally 1e.
Saying a new setting wouldn't work because older editions didn't have, before that setting was released and the new "crunch" to go with it, that setting wouldn't work in the current edition either. You could run Eberron just fine in 1e AD&D, or Basic D&D, with just as much custom rules as it took for 3.5, creating some custom races and classes and maybe a few more "fiddly bits".
I used to play and run Forgotten Realms in 2e, now I can do so as easily or better in 3e. Forgotten Realms was originally a 1st Edition setting, by the way. It was released in the twilight of 1e and became much bigger in 2e, but it was originally 1e.
Philotomy Jurament
First Post
That 1E grey-box version wasn't an abomination.wingsandsword said:
dragonlordofpoondari
Explorer
Philotomy Jurament said:
I agree. That's my favorite incarnation of the realms.
wingsandsword
Legend
Uh, maybe I failed my Detect Sarcasm check, but I don't believe I called it an abomination, I was trying to point out that Forgotten Realms was originally a 1e setting, to refute the idea that it's wedded too strongly to 2e to be played in 1e.Philotomy Jurament said:
Psion
Adventurer
2e and 3e were the "homebrew editions" for me.
1e was the "vaguely defined setting that we played modules in" setting.
In actuality, that's not quite true. Though my homebrews had beginnings and places were I had stopped using them, they haven't neatly corresponded to the edition starts and ends. My Trinalia setting started in late 1e, underwent extensive development and play during 2e, saw a fantastic campaign for 3.0, and my interest in it started to taper off in 3.5 as my River or Worlds over-setting began to come into its own.
1e was the "vaguely defined setting that we played modules in" setting.
In actuality, that's not quite true. Though my homebrews had beginnings and places were I had stopped using them, they haven't neatly corresponded to the edition starts and ends. My Trinalia setting started in late 1e, underwent extensive development and play during 2e, saw a fantastic campaign for 3.0, and my interest in it started to taper off in 3.5 as my River or Worlds over-setting began to come into its own.
I also have to disagree that settings are somehow inherently better for one edition or system versus another.
During the three-four years I played 3.0 I ran almost exclusively Greyhawk for the 1st two years, then about a year in Kalamar, before jumping a bit between some homebrew stuff and one very disatrous attempt at a Dragonlance campaign.
Of all of this, Greyhawk was still the best by far - and it was an epic campaign that took the party throughout the Flanaess.
Now, I would agree that settings become "landmarked" along-side certain editions, and most of the connections made by the OP are mostly accurate. I would say they are signature settings as follows:
OD&D - Wilderlands (Judges Guild), Blackmoor & early Greyhawk
Basic/Expert D&D - Mystara
AD&D 1e - Greyhawk
AD&D 2e - Forgotten Realms
WotC D&D 3.5 - Eberron
I intentionally left 3.0 blank here, because I think (for the few years before Eberron came out and 3.5 took over) during this time there wasn't really a signature setting - the default world was Greyhawk but it certainly wasn't dominant, FR had lots of stuff put out, but none really took over.
Quite honestly, if you asked me, the signature for 3.0 could have been Kalamar from Kenzer Co., just because it was the only real setting mainly devoted to d20/3.0 before Eberron came along with 3.5. Just a thought, and I'm sure plenty would disagree.
During the three-four years I played 3.0 I ran almost exclusively Greyhawk for the 1st two years, then about a year in Kalamar, before jumping a bit between some homebrew stuff and one very disatrous attempt at a Dragonlance campaign.
Of all of this, Greyhawk was still the best by far - and it was an epic campaign that took the party throughout the Flanaess.
Now, I would agree that settings become "landmarked" along-side certain editions, and most of the connections made by the OP are mostly accurate. I would say they are signature settings as follows:
OD&D - Wilderlands (Judges Guild), Blackmoor & early Greyhawk
Basic/Expert D&D - Mystara
AD&D 1e - Greyhawk
AD&D 2e - Forgotten Realms
WotC D&D 3.5 - Eberron
I intentionally left 3.0 blank here, because I think (for the few years before Eberron came out and 3.5 took over) during this time there wasn't really a signature setting - the default world was Greyhawk but it certainly wasn't dominant, FR had lots of stuff put out, but none really took over.
Quite honestly, if you asked me, the signature for 3.0 could have been Kalamar from Kenzer Co., just because it was the only real setting mainly devoted to d20/3.0 before Eberron came along with 3.5. Just a thought, and I'm sure plenty would disagree.
Similar Threads
