How Fleshed out IS PoL going to be?

[Remathilis]

We know the "Points of Light/Default" D&D setting is getting some serious fluff injection. There are the new planes, the new races, the new origins for older monsters, and the new sample gods. We also have plenty of references to named ancient empires of the dragonborn, tieflings and humans (and others) Heck, there will even be a starting town in the DMG.

But how much further are they/should they going to go? World Name? Map? Kingdoms? Calandar? Will it really be a "setting out of the box" or even with all of this, still be some assembly required?

Thoughts, hints, anything welcomed.

 

[Merlin the Tuna]

I have no idea how we could possibly make anything other than unfounded wild guesses here.

 

[The Ubbergeek]

I guess later, there may be a world book or regional book offered, if they notice the world is liked and popular... Why wouldn't they? It's how Mystara started....

 

[FadedC]

They said that alot the whole point of PoL is to have large areas of unexplored parts of the map that the DM can put whatever he feels like in. That makes it sounds like they are trying not to flesh the default setting out too much.

 

[Cadfan]

I'm pretty sure that "points of light" isn't a location. Its a design philosophy. Nobody is going to say, "My campaign is in Points of Light."

 

[Glyfair]

They said that alot the whole point of PoL is to have large areas of unexplored parts of the map that the DM can put whatever he feels like in. That makes it sounds like they are trying not to flesh the default setting out too much.

Indeed, I agree. They are setting up the basic cosmology, and creating a few concepts. I expect that the adventures (except for the Forgotten Realms adventure they are working on) will be assumed to exist there. Other than that, I think they will avoid creating an explicit world.

 

[Xethreau]

I wouldn't mind if the default world eventually became its own campaign setting, but I would not want it to jump out at me from the Big Three. I like PoL, and the new cosmology and all, but I think that setting up that and an entire world is a bit different.

 

[Irda Ranger]

But how much further are they/should they going to go? World Name? Map? Kingdoms? Calandar? Will it really be a "setting out of the box" or even with all of this, still be some assembly required?

Thoughts, hints, anything welcomed.

No hints or evidence, but I expect they'll develop as much as they need to run an adventure, and no further. You need Gods for that. You need a little flavor and history to give perspective, and know where you fit in the adventuring group and how to interact with the world around you. But you don't need to know the name of the world, or the name of the month. So they probably won't mention it.

 

[WayneLigon]

But how much further are they/should they going to go? World Name? Map? Kingdoms? Calandar? Will it really be a "setting out of the box" or even with all of this, still be some assembly required?

I don't think it comes anywhere close to the level of detail required of even a bare-bones setting; I wouldn't call it a 'setting' at all. It's more of a design philosophy to hang some stuff on for the novice GM. I don't think the changes to planes or races or gods have anything to actually do with the 'POL' other than a couple sentences about ancient empires and the like.

 

[Nikosandros]

I have of course no idea about what WotC is planning to do, but I believe that the best idea would be to keep dropping references to a rich background like we are seeing in the previews, without ever specifying it too much, publishing actual maps, etc...