Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Levistus's_Leviathan" data-source="post: 8405763" data-attributes="member: 7023887">I guess WotC does. However, "new" and "cool" are often synonyms, as long as the lore is executed correctly. (And though coolness is normally subjective, I do believe that somethings are just objectively cool, like a war between Giants and Dragons or a war between Primordials and Gods. It's like art, it's largely subjective, but there is such a thing as good and bad art.)I'm not sure that's true. They showed up to an edition of D&D that went back to its roots at the beginning, but Critical Role, Acquisitions Incorporated, M:tG settings, and similar examples are making it fairly evident that that point isn't as important to D&D 5e as it was the beginning of the edition. Traditional at the start of 5e is why it succeeded, the new fans being brought in by D&D livestreams, the simple mechanics, and internet stories/discussions about it is why it's continuing to succeed. I agree. The core setting shouldn't be the FR. It's too big and convoluted for the base game. D&D 5e is the most simple and straightforward edition of D&D, and that paid off and WotC knows that it will work when the next edition comes out, but having a simple, new setting to be the default world (if there is one) in D&D 5.5e/6e will also pay off.</blockquote>