D&D 5E How about this for 5E Campaign Settings: "Classic Worlds of D&D"

[Nellisir]

Both of those products were excellent (and I have them both), but they don't go far enough into the lore or geography or geopolitics or history.

Fun Fact: I'm in The Adventure Begins. Roger wrote a bunch of people from the AOL boards into the book as NPCs.

Also, the sad fact here is that we're into damned if you do, damned if you don't. Some people _hated_ those books. Went way too far into detail for them. I'm cool with it, since I homebrew and always have, but....

 

[Nellisir]

That's great, I didn't think it was 80%..... this really offers some counter to Rob Kuntz's rant about creatives vs. "eager dependents", and the whole Old School lamentation of the rise of the Railroad plot. Or at least, moves that discussion forward. Railroad modules do suck, but if 80% of us used em for parts, it was hardly the tectonic shift we hear about.
Personally I think the Golden Age of the RPG is now, not the 80's, not the d20 era, but now - it seems every main branch is flowering.

It was an amazingly high percentage. The poll was way back in the late '90's, I think, and I can't link to it (but it's probably out there somewhere), but most people did not play the adventures in Dungeon. I remember feeling very gratified when I read it; I'd always assumed I was in a small minority that wasted their money on an adventure magazine that I never ran adventures from.

 

[Quartz]

It was an amazingly high percentage. The poll was way back in the late '90's, I think, and I can't link to it (but it's probably out there somewhere), but most people did not play the adventures in Dungeon. I remember feeling very gratified when I read it; I'd always assumed I was in a small minority that wasted their money on an adventure magazine that I never ran adventures from.

Was that in part why they started the Adventure Paths? I remember [del]stealing[/del] adapting liberally from Dungeon.

 

[Mercurius]

No, Nerath's treatment in the D&D4 material is anemic, but still clearly follows the D&D3 model of full core setting development. As you pointed out, the problem was that Wizards did not commit. Others have stated that they want "homebrew" to be the core setting of D&D5, but I tend to agree with you: that is what D&D4 did wrong. The core setting of D&D4 was not Nerath, it was "your setting," and the Nerath stuff never made the jump from inspirational filler to gazetteer.

The Paizo settings in Polyhedron ten years ago were sort of the opposite. Gazetteer detail, but with no attempt made to cover /everything/.

This makes me wonder what percentage of DMs use homebrew vs. published settings. Maybe a poll is in order, although I'm thinking that EN World is more towards the homebrew side than the total DM populace.

But my view isn't only about what is used, but how it effects the community and game itself. Golarion makes Pathfinder seem "alive." It is a living, developing world. It gives context to the Adventure Paths. 4e didn't have that, despite the fact that people seemed to generally like Nentir Vale. That, to me, was a bit tactical mistake on the part of WotC.

(This isn't the only reason why 4e failed, mind you - and perhaps not even the main; but I think it is one that is both significant and not fully recognized)

If Wizards wanted to support multiple settings in D&D5, maybe they start with an appropriately priced 80-page book updating JUST Waterdeep, or the Dales. Good detail, all new stuff. Lots of what, who, and why. Adventure hooks. Reference the old material.

Then they follow up with a similar book updating the City of Greyhawk. Then Abanasinia. Then Cormyr. Then a big premium collector's edition boxed set for Sigil (of course). Then Solamnia.

I mean, I'm only just now realizing this, but isn't that still Paizo's model, essentially? I don't collect Golarion books, but it seems like the vast majority of the setting material for Pathfinder is not in a big hardbound book entitled GOLARION: THE PATHFINDER CAMPAIGN SETTING.

Paizo's model is both. They have a big honkin' 320-page hardcover that is a general overview, then dozens of 64-page supplements that detail different regions, cities, themes, etc. It has worked out gloriously well.

I think that's the best way to go: a big hardcover for the overview, and for those folks that either A) just want it for reading pleasure and for ideas, and B) just want broad strokes that they can fill in. Then have supplements that detail different things.

The problem, though, is that they've already done this with the Forgotten Realms..twice. Once for AD&D, overlapping 1E but mainly 2E, and once for 3E. This is one of the reasons why I feel that doing it for 5E with the Realms would be a mistake. A bit honkin' book with maybe a few supplements to flesh out certain regions? Sure. But covering the whole continent again? No, unless of course its significantly different that what we've seen before.

So again, my strategy (which is changing as this thread goes on, but hopefully becoming better!) would be to have a diversified approach: Big, beautiful setting books for the classic settings, within which can be a chapter focus on a starting region like you describe, and then come out with a new setting to develop in an ongoing fashion similarly to Golarion.

5e Realms is going to lose a lot of the 4e stuff, I think that's a given. Some of it will change; in a sense, what WotC is doing is honing the setting by periodically getting rid of the stuff no one likes or uses. In the upgrade from 2e to 3e, chunks of the Shaar, Great Glacier, and Anarouch (sp?) disappeared because, frankly, nothing was there and it was boring. Abeir might have been interesting, but WotC never developed it at all . There are aspects of the 4e version that probably worked, however, and will remain.

I've always found that the undeveloped parts are some of the most intriguing...it goes back to the basic principle of having parts of map unexplored, unknown, terra incognita. There's nothing more exciting in looking at a map then wondering: What's off the edge of that map? For people who grew up on D&D in the early 80s like myself, they know the thrill of wondering what lay beyond the Sea of Dust...This isn't only off the map, but within the map. In the Realms, this might have been, what lies within the High Forest? Or what is the Vilhon Reach really all about?

I'd go for a new presentation of Greyhawk, but not one that invalidated the material I already have. I want to upgrade, not undercut. I don't think that means a radical reset, though.

Fair enough. Greyhawk is relatively easy I think, in that while it has seen significant changes over the years, it isn't that different from its original Gygaxian inception. Forgotten Realms and Dragonlance are a different matter, though. It sounds like Ed Greenwood has a plan, though...

Failure to utilize Anna B Meyer's maps for Greyhawk from here on out will constitute an automatic fail for WotC. I don't care if they revive Gary to write a 700 page opus; there is nothing, and I mean nothing, even close to Anna's maps for Greyhawk.

I agree! They're amazing. I only have a 14" laptop so I haven't seen them in full glory, but would love to see a huge poster map set. Maybe I should look at them on my 42" TV.

It doesn't surprise me that we're mostly talking about FR and Greyhawk. I could be really interested in a serious reskinning of Mystara to take away some of the "gee-whiz" factor, and a new treatment of Birthright would be really cool; one that deals with it as a "normal" setting rather than the domain game it never quite succeeded at (it should get bigger, too. It's actually really really tiny - according to Roger Moore, the whole "continent" is about the size of Nyrond.)

While I like Birthright, I think it will stay in the vault. Mystara is questionable. If you go back to this post I put Mystara in a "tier two" with settings like Dragonlance and Eberron as settings that are "maybes" for 5E development, but I consign Birthright to a third tier with Spelljammer and probably Al-Qadim, Kara-Tur, Jakandor, etc, as "probably best left in the closet or incorporated somewhere else." So I could see Birthright used in a Kingdom Builder type book, or Al-Qadim incorporated into the Realms (although I always found that a bit odd, especially with the similarly themed Calimshan).

 

[Nellisir]

Was that in part why they started the Adventure Paths? I remember [del]stealing[/del] adapting liberally from Dungeon.

I think the Adventure Paths were born out of desire to have a 1-20 campaign arc. Higher number of people playing the adventures doesn't necessarily mean higher number of sales; you could just be converting readers to players. Readers are still buying the magazine, after all.

 

[DMZ2112]

This makes me wonder what percentage of DMs use homebrew vs. published settings. Maybe a poll is in order, although I'm thinking that EN World is more towards the homebrew side than the total DM populace.

I would be very, very surprised if the vast majority of dungeon masters do not homebrew their own settings, even if they play some official settings on the side. I think the real question is where you draw the line in terms of what a homebrew setting is -- you could make the argument that anyone who has ever run a game on Oerth is actually a homebrewer because the setting relies so heavily on dungeon masters to fill in its finer detail. And there are certainly many dungeon masters who use aspects of Faerun in ways that would be unrecognizable to Greenwood.

A bit honkin' book with maybe a few supplements to flesh out certain regions? Sure. But covering the whole continent again? No, unless of course its significantly different that what we've seen before.

I am mostly in agreement, but you have to cover the continent to some degree. For new players.

Fair enough. Greyhawk is relatively easy I think, in that while it has seen significant changes over the years, it isn't that different from its original Gygaxian inception. Forgotten Realms and Dragonlance are a different matter, though. It sounds like Ed Greenwood has a plan, though...

Sundering II: Electric Boogaloo.

You know, I think the strongest argument against yet another apocalypse is the fact that they've run out of words. When you have to start reusing synonyms for apocalypse, it's time to stop apocalypsing.

So I could see Birthright used in a Kingdom Builder type book, or Al-Qadim incorporated into the Realms (although I always found that a bit odd, especially with the similarly themed Calimshan).

Zakhara is on Toril. The Calishites are the descendants of Zakharans.

 

[Mercurius]

I would be very, very surprised if the vast majority of dungeon masters do not homebrew their own settings, even if they play some official settings on the side. I think the real question is where you draw the line in terms of what a homebrew setting is -- you could make the argument that anyone who has ever run a game on Oerth is actually a homebrewer because the setting relies so heavily on dungeon masters to fill in its finer detail. And there are certainly many dungeon masters who use aspects of Faerun in ways that would be unrecognizable to Greenwood.

We shall see.

I am mostly in agreement, but you have to cover the continent to some degree. For new players.

I agree and I think I didn't express myself adequately. Yes, a whole world book that covers the entire continent. But I'm talking about the regional books - do we need to go through a third cycle? I mean, I suppose they could assemble it differently this time; for instance, I'd love to see a hardcovers that cover the following regions for the realms:

"The Sword Coast and the North"
"The Dalelands and Moonsea"
"That peninsula thingy with Halruaa, Chult, Luiren, etc"

And so on.

Sundering II: Electric Boogaloo.

You know, I think the strongest argument against yet another apocalypse is the fact that they've run out of words. When you have to start reusing synonyms for apocalypse, it's time to stop apocalypsing.

No doubt. I've actually run into this problem with my own campaign design. My in-development world has numerous apocalypses in its past that separate great world ages (who doesn't love a good apocalypse?) but it gets a bit tricky as to what to name them. I don't want to just have "The Apocalypse" followed by "The Cataclysm" followed by "The Upheaval" and then "The Sundering," "The Devastation," etc. I've come to the conclusion that if there is one big or main one it makes sense to give it a generalize term - like the Cataclysm in Dragonlance, at least during the Chronicles/Legends period - but for numerous ones, then more descriptive (and evocative) terms work, like "The Breaking of the World" or "The Rain of Fire." Etc.

Zakhara is on Toril. The Calishites are the descendants of Zakharans.

Yeah, but it was imported post-Greenwood and post-Gray box. Wasn't it in the 3e hardcover that they first drew this connection? I never owned the Al-Qadim book, but I didn't think it was in that - or am I wrong?

EDIT: According to the Land of Fate description on Amazon, I am wrong - Zakhara was seemingly conceived of as part of the Realms. Interesting. I'm also surprised by how many Al-Qadim products there are - I thought there were only a few.

 

[DMZ2112]

"That peninsula thingy with Halruaa, Chult, Luiren, etc"

Make sure you get Michael Komarck for the cover of that one; you're going to want to take some attention away from the title.

 

[Nellisir]

EDIT: According to the Land of Fate description on Amazon, I am wrong - Zakhara was seemingly conceived of as part of the Realms. Interesting. I'm also surprised by how many Al-Qadim products there are - I thought there were only a few.

Zakhara was published as part of the Forgotten Realms, but the connections were really really faint at best, and I'm 99% sure Zakhara wasn't conceived of when FR first came out. So AQ was appended to FR, but not vice versa. Or soemthing.

Yeah, quite a few products. I guess it was conceived of as a 4 year thing and they stretched it to five, or something. It wasn't open-ended from the beginning, I remember that, but they stuck another year on.

 

[dd.stevenson]

Zakhara was published as part of the Forgotten Realms, but the connections were really really faint at best (snip)

Yeah, this. I took Zakhara and dropped it in the Midgard setting, and for a year now the campaign has run straight from the AQ sourcebooks without any problems whatsoever.