D&D (2024) Heroes of the Borderlands

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Against the Slave Lords has young orcs and hobgoblins

The slave lords modules seem to want players to at least engage with some moral questions, even if it's in a very surface way.

 

[Demetrios1453]

I really hope Justice Armin gets to do his version of Dark Sun. Not long after it started to look like WotC wasn't going to ever bother (and I think that they really did give up), Justice posted/tweeted that he'd like to take a stab at it. He's only had more WotC work since then, so I could see them taking a look at what he came up with. Maybe he convinced them to give it a shot?

I'd also love to see him tackle Kara-Tur or Al-Qadim. Frankly, give him anything he wants that has "problematic" elements, I think he can handle them!

I've mentioned elsewhere that I do wonder if the Calimshan section of the new FR DM book is a bit of a trial balloon to see if "problematic" elements can be done properly in the new paradigm. If it goes well, I bet we'll see some futher "risky" settings/locations in its wake.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I've mentioned elsewhere that I do wonder if the Calimshan section of the new FR DM book is a bit of a trial balloon to see if "problematic" elements can be done properly in the new paradigm. If it goes well, I bet we'll see some futher "risky" settings/locations in its wake.

It certainly stands out from the pack. The rest of them all look, to me, like settings they can package for TV, comics and movies, as they come with ready-made NPCs, images and story types (which they even highlight in their pitch).

Calimsham, on the other hand, is wildly different in flavor and doesn't have that kind of pitch to go with it. And if I wanted to do an Arabian Nights fantasy property, I don't know that I'd want to license one from Hasbro, as opposed to just taking the public domain Burton version and running off over the horizon with it.

So I think them being up to something different with Calimsham seems likely. And trying to make an unproblematic Calimsham as part of a larger book is a lot cheaper than, say, trying to do a whole Al-Qadim book and possibly failing.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

I think it's 13th Age that has dungeons as living eldritch entities, creeping up from beneath the surface. That's always seemed like a neat idea to me, and truly caves of chaos.

I love that idea.

 

[Stormonu]

The slave lords modules seem to want players to at least engage with some moral questions, even if it's in a very surface way.

Which for me, is perfectly fine. While D&D for me is an escape from the drudgery of reality, I feel like I'm adult enough I can handle a bit of moral gray areas as long as its interesting.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Which part of Goblins were NOT people did you not understand. What part of Grimms Fairytales, The Fairybooks, and Bullfinch's did you NOT understand...or was it NOT PART of your education to even read those (elementary for Grimms, HS for Bullfinch's)?

It seems I've read quite a bit that you haven't, such as W.B. Yeat's Irish Fairy and Folk Tales. Sure, they aint human, but that doesn't mean it's okay to harm them (even the malicious ones) - trying to do so is likely to get you (and your decedents) cursed.

But FYI, none of those sources you cite are read in British schools (Greek and Norse myths are covered in primary schools).

But Celtic folklore has little to do with early D&D goblins, which are clearly lifted from The Hobbit. It is more of an influence on current D&D goblins. Now Tolkien was a soldier in WW1, and we know that soldiers are taught to dehumanise the enemy, because it's psychologically difficult for most humans to kill another human. Tolkien is self-aware, and draws attention to this in LotR when the mask slips when Sam sees the dead Easterling. But this is not a common concept in Fantasy, and is not present at all in those other authors you mentioned. As for Gygax, he is clearly coming from the "game" side of the hobby, rather than the "role playing" side. It simply didn't occur to him to think about the moral implications, or where the goblins go to the toilet. To him they are counters in a game, not characters in a story.

 

[Dax Doomslayer]

I know in Greyhawk Ruins there were also "monster children" in a number of places also (though that was 2E)

 

[Micah Sweet]

I get what you mean by it, but how do you determine that whatever the starter set does with it does not fall into the 'try to improve and add to it' category (esp. since you specifically point out 'even attempted improvements') ?

Or in other words, why is Return to the Keep on the Borderlands a proper improvement and the starter set is not? Or are both cash grabs riding on nostalgia?

Return to the Keep on the Borderlands (2e) - Wizards of the Coast | Adventures | AD&D 2nd Ed. | Dungeon Masters Guild

Return to the Keep on the Borderlands (2e) - First published in 1981, B2, The Keep on the Borderlands by Gary Gygax as been played by more people than any other role

www.dmsguild.com

Return expanded just about every aspect of the adventure, adding more to the original. That is additive and an improvement. I admit I don't know what they're planning to do with the starter, but given the premise of KotB (wildly out of step with WotC's current design parameters) and the IMO meager but still annoying changes made to create 5.5 as just enough of a new edition that you buy $150+ worth of replacement books, I simply have no faith in WotC's desire to trade on KotB in a way that's not simply a nostalgia-fueled cash grab. At best I think it will be a radically different adventure, good or bad, with some of the same proper nouns to get the grognards attention.

 

[Remathilis]

Which part of Goblins were NOT people did you not understand. What part of Grimms Fairytales, The Fairybooks, and Bullfinch's did you NOT understand...or was it NOT PART of your education to even read those (elementary for Grimms, HS for Bullfinch's)?

This is NOT a mystery.

Someone requested specific fairy tales of stories of goblins with children...most of the fairytales don't have goblins with children. The Goblins are more of creatures that go bump in the night and do evil things.

If we get into the children aspect, that would normally have to do more with elves (and not the Tolkien elves that D&D adapted, but the elves of fairy tales) which varied from good and helpful to evil and mischievous. Same with Fairies and such.

With Goblins and Ghouls and even speaking Animals, Normally children were the ones being plagued or killed or harmed by the evil creatures in fairytales.

I don't recall anything in the fairy tales about Goblins with children.

It's important to remember that in mythology, elves, dwarves and gnomes were equally dangerous, alien and malicious. The elves and dwarves of Norse mythology are not the kindly folk of Tokien, and Irish elves and gnomes were no better than the goblins you claimed were inhuman. The court of the fey were vicious even at their most benevolent. If D&D was to follow mythology to the letter, there would be no playable races but humans.

 

[Hriston]

It intrigues me that Greyhawk is getting the core and starter feature while the Realms get a two-book set.

Is there something in the press-release (or whatever it is that's being talked about here) that indicates the adventure is set in Greyhawk? The OP seems to say the setting is "the Borderlands", same as the original module. It's described (in B2) as an area on the borders of "the Realm" which is surrounded by "the forces of Chaos". This most strongly resembles the setting of Three Hearts and Three Lions by Poul Anderson from which, I believe, it was cribbed.