D&D 5E Hope for Nerath? (On D&D Next Campaign Settings and a Plea to WotC)

[Mercurius]

This seems to be a matter of semantics - default/central, what does it matter which deities are in the PHB? The point is that the Forgotten Realms has been the most supported setting for the last 25 years, and it doesn't seem that this will change. I like the setting but I'd like to see something new more.

 

[haakon1]

Looks like part of a lost continent of Oerth, to me.

Nod. White Plume Mountain. Vault of the Drow. Lost Caverns of Tsojcanth. Temple of Elemental Evil. There's a lot of Greyhawk randomly on that map, apparently with the Greyhawk surgically removed.

Speaking as a long-time Greyhawk fan, I more disheartened to see the IP ripped from the setting than I am to see the old names applied to new stuff.

Like when I saw "Kingdom of the Ghouls" from WOTC for 4e at my FLGS, but without Wolfgang Baur's name on it (he created it), it pissed me off.

So I guess my plea is:
1) We don't need another crappy version of Greyhawk that doesn't respect the source material. Looking at you "From the Ashes" from the 2e era. But a RESPECTFUL republishing of the actual world Gygax created (plus Paizohawk additions), like the Living Greyhawk Gazeteer from 3e would fine. The hope beyond hope would be if WOTC just gave the setting to Paizo, but heck, I wish they'd give the name "D&D" to Paizo too, and that's not going to happen.

2) We don't need another crappy version of Forgotten Realms. I'm not a Realms fan, but it seems like it gets yanked around at will by WOTC to move low quality rules. If Ed Greenwood writes what he wants, not as a product tie-in but because he actually wants to, fine.

3) We really don't need another full blown setting. 5e should be about uniting, not dividing with yet another new thing.

So 5e in Realms, if it's done in a quality way, is probably the best answer. Maybe with nods to other existing settings like the Nentir Vale.

 

[Remathilis]

Speaking as a long-time Greyhawk fan, I more disheartened to see the IP ripped from the setting than I am to see the old names applied to new stuff.

I know. Its like when Blackmoor and the Keep on the Borderlands were ripped off Mystara and put into Greyhawk...

Oh. right.

 

[Gargoyle]

This seems to be a matter of semantics - default/central, what does it matter which deities are in the PHB? The point is that the Forgotten Realms has been the most supported setting for the last 25 years, and it doesn't seem that this will change. I like the setting but I'd like to see something new more.

I agree for the most part. It's not a big deal, just annoying to me to see Nerath gods in the PHB if they don't support Nerath as much as FR. I guess it's a pet peeve.

I also agree I'd like to see something new, but I have very little hopes for it. When the video games are all set in FR, it makes little marketing sense not to make FR the official setting of D&D too. I think the success of the video games is the main reason for doing so.

 

[jadrax]

I know. Its like when Blackmoor and the Keep on the Borderlands were ripped off Mystara and put into Greyhawk...

Oh. right.

To be fair, more than a few Greyhawk fans rant about those being very bad ideas as well.

 

[Mercurius]

I also agree I'd like to see something new, but I have very little hopes for it. When the video games are all set in FR, it makes little marketing sense not to make FR the official setting of D&D too. I think the success of the video games is the main reason for doing so.

Another approach they could take, which might make more financial sense, is to start out with the FR as the main setting and introduce a new setting once year. Sort of a reversal of the idea in the OP. Depending upon popularity, one or more of these settings could be more fully developed. Perhaps the first year they could not only publish the FR, but also a Nerath world book. If it is very popular, they can develop it with a new product each quarter, alongside the FR schedule; if not, they try something else a year later.

I like the FR, but what depresses me is not that they're going to support it but the distinct possibility that they will only do classic settings. Of course it fits the cultural milieu of remaking sf/fantasy movies and not coming up with anything new.

 

[Dire Bare]

Because as I understand it, WotC don't actually own the Forgotten Realms, they basically rent it from Ed Greenwood. Thus the contract allows him to reclaim all related Trademarks, Copyright and other content in certain circumstances.

I was pretty surprised when FR gods turned up in the 4th edition Core tbh.

Nope. WotC owns Forgotten Realms lock, stock, and barrel. They purchased the complete rights from Greenwood a loooong time ago, and he only has as much input to the setting as WotC allows. Which, wisely, WotC has always let Greenwood have an active hand in the setting's development, and it looks like they are giving him even more with the D&D Next version.

The only D&D stuff WotC doesn't have complete rights to, as I understand it, is early Dragon Mag articles and the Cthulu mythos (from Dieties & Demigods). Well, and also the licensed stuff, like Conan, Nehwon, and Diablo.

 

[Dire Bare]

Speaking as a long-time Greyhawk fan, I more disheartened to see the IP ripped from the setting than I am to see the old names applied to new stuff.

Like when I saw "Kingdom of the Ghouls" from WOTC for 4e at my FLGS, but without Wolfgang Baur's name on it (he created it), it pissed me off.

(@ Haakon1 - this isn't so much aimed at you, but at this attitude in general, not trying to pick on you)

Meh, that attitude isn't a very good one, IMO. The Greyhawk bits-and-pieces that got incorporated into D&D 4E are "larger" than Greyhawk as a distinct setting. Yes, when originally written and published, much of it (but not all of it) was set in Greyhawk . . . but this rarely was made explicit in the published modules and many gamers consider these bits part of the classic D&D experience who have never played Greyhawk. I know I do. It bothers me not that bits of Arneson's Blackmoor campaign got incorporated into Greyhawk, and then later incorporated again into Mystara . . . and yet again in D&D 4E. Doesn't take away from the original in any way.

Plus, taking older material and reworking it into something new is a huge part of art and literature, not just game design. Disliking something because it "stole" parts from something else you liked is silly . . . . however, thinking that it was done poorly is legit, as quality is a separate issue.

I think the real issue many fans have is, "Why did you take parts of my favorite setting and put them into something else, instead of releasing a new version of my favorite setting instead?" Which is similar to, "Why did you make that product, instead of the product I wanted?" Or, "Why did you make the product in that certain way, when I would have done it differently?"

WotC, or any game company, making decisions that go against your own preferences shouldn't piss you off, nor does it make them a bad company, nor does it make the decision itself a bad one . . . it just isn't to your tastes and preferences. Be disappointed, sigh wistfully at what could have been if only you were in charge, but don't get pissed and angry . . . it's silly!

I personally know exactly what WotC should do to create the most awesome D&D ever, both rules, settings, and how the information is presented . . . . but if WotC foolishly chooses to go another direction, I certainly won't get pissed off about it.

 

[Fifth Element]

Meh, that attitude isn't a very good one, IMO. The Greyhawk bits-and-pieces that got incorporated into D&D 4E are "larger" than Greyhawk as a distinct setting. Yes, when originally written and published, much of it (but not all of it) was set in Greyhawk . . . but this rarely was made explicit in the published modules and many gamers consider these bits part of the classic D&D experience who have never played Greyhawk. I know I do. It bothers me not that bits of Arneson's Blackmoor campaign got incorporated into Greyhawk, and then later incorporated again into Mystara . . . and yet again in D&D 4E. Doesn't take away from the original in any way.

Good post altogether. It seems especially strange to me to be talking about purity of source material when discussing a kitchen-sink setting like Greyhawk (not meant to be derogatory in any way). Random stuff in the setting is fine, so long as it was already there when I started playing.

 

[TarionzCousin]

Who here wouldn't submit an entry if they had an open call for campaign settings? Didn't Eberron sell well enough to justify its existence?