Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mercurius" data-source="post: 6234565" data-attributes="member: 59082">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)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.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?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...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.While I like Birthright, I think it will stay in the vault. Mystara is questionable. If you go back to <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?350038-How-about-this-for-5E-Campaign-Settings-quot-Classic-Worlds-of-D-amp-D-quot/page2&p=6233603&viewfull=1#post6233603" target="_blank">this post</a> 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).</blockquote>

Verification