I often wonder what a D&D campaign world would look like if made with 2021 sensibilities
Depends if you mean a traditional setting with 2021 sensibilities or a setting built from the ground up for 2021 gamers.
I often wonder what a D&D campaign world would look like if made with 2021 sensibilities
I continue to run a campaign. The D&D police haven't broken down my door yet. Does that count?I often wonder what a D&D campaign world would look like if made with 2021 sensibilities
Well I was thinking a fantasy setting that runs on the current system and has a mind for the modern idea of fantasy.Depends if you mean a traditional setting with 2021 sensibilities or a setting built from the ground up for 2021 gamers.
I mean me too, been running since 96ish but regularly since 2001. I have plenty of my own ideas and campaign settings, but I mean a WotC setting.I continue to run a campaign. The D&D police haven't broken down my door yet. Does that count?![]()
It is. Honestly I don't feel like it's all that different from Eberron in some ways, a different, more high fantasy, less pulp-y vibe, but they're both pretty modern. Honestly if we're just looking at social elements, I think you could pretty much reprint Eberron and say it was "new for 2021" and few, if any people would question it. There's probably more subtle inclusiveness in Exandria, but it's not a huge gap and 99% of what people are mad about about 5E changes is basically already the case in Eberron in 2004.I don't know a ton about Exandria...seems pretty generic in a lot of ways?
I couldn't guess at specifics but I would definitely say "overly ambitious." Attempts to be inclusive and show breadth would lead to a huge world of a bunch of cultural archetypes either "done correctly" or intentionally built against type. There would be too many playable races and by extension races with prominent positions in the setting, and few if any would get their due because of it. I would also bet that it would spend a lot of time trying to.conv8nce the reader that every kind of adventure you can think of would fit perfectly in every part of the setting, ultimately making every part of the setting bland and similar.I mean me too, been running since 96ish but regularly since 2001. I have plenty of my own ideas and campaign settings, but I mean a WotC setting.
I know. But it's an issue with all big company mass media isn't it? How many Spider-Man movies have we had?Well I was thinking a fantasy setting that runs on the current system and has a mind for the modern idea of fantasy.
I mean me too, been running since 96ish but regularly since 2001. I have plenty of my own ideas and campaign settings, but I mean a WotC setting.
i.e. the forgotten realmsI couldn't guess at specifics but I would definitely say "overly ambitious." Attempts to be inclusive and show breadth would lead to a huge world of a bunch of cultural archetypes either "done correctly" or intentionally built against type. There would be too many playable races and by extension races with prominent positions in the setting, and few if any would get their due because of it. I would also bet that it would spend a lot of time trying to.conv8nce the reader that every kind of adventure you can think of would fit perfectly in every part of the setting, ultimately making every part of the setting bland and similar.
Well I was thinking a fantasy setting that runs on the current system and has a mind for the modern idea of fantasy.
Winninger outright told us they're working on two new campaign settings to be released in the next few years (presumably before 2024).I don't expect to see a big release of a new campaign world anytime soon.
And before that, Dungeon of the Mad Mage and Tales from the Yawning Portal.Just to name a few; Fizban's Treasury of Dragons, Van Richten's Guide to Ravenloft, and Icewind Dale: Rime of the Frostmaiden.
As well as Ghosts of Saltmarsh, Curse of Strahd, and the SCAG.And before that, Dungeon of the Mad Mage and Tales from the Yawning Portal.
I don't know a ton about Exandria...seems pretty generic in a lot of ways?
Generic is perfectly fine. I just don't see it as a particularly "2021" setting. Then again, I don't think what the "kids nowadays" want from high fantasy is something markedly different from standard high fantasy convention. Hence, no "sea change"I don't know a lot, either, aside from it being the Critical Role setting and that my college friend who is now 49 loves it and she has started DMing an online campaign I am a player in. My extremely limited understanding is that it's pretty generic with good background details of the various countries and locations.
Generic isn't a bad thing. My favorite world is Mystara and its basics are thoroughly generic with the hallmark (when done right) being a bit gonzo and nations with great detail. It's built on the foundations of BECMI and doesn't stray too far from it. In fact, it uses the rules to explain why the world is the way it is. E.g., the elf gazetteer explains why there are no half elves. The Glantri book uses the fact that dwarves and halflings can't be magic-users and have high magic resistance to good effect, imo.
In other words, being generic isn't a problem if there is enough on the culture and background of the locations to make it interesting. And my understanding is Exandria succeeds in that.
I think if we are honest, its about presentation of the setting, way way more than about the setting actually being restrictive.Not hugely different from 2004, say, and only a little different from 1994, say, but pretty different from say 1984.
But how would that attract bunches of people? I don't think there's a particular correlation between being annoyed with 5E's changes and liking "dark fantasy" (also I would question whether Midgard is "dark fantasy". If it is, Earthdawn definitely, and a whole lot of stuff is - arguably Golarion is even, it's about as dark as Midgard). It seems like the people who are "stomping their foot" mad are all mad about stuff like non-all-evil orcs and so on, so you'd have to go a bit further than that.
I do find it odd that official D&D is not a good emulator for that kind of fantasy, at least in tone. I guess there's more money in light and cheerful. Anyway, plenty of 3rd party products handle that stuff well.Outside of D&D I think the most popular fantasy settings tend to be stuff like The Witcher and Game of Thrones, mostly not super dark but certainly much darker than D&D's current direction. I'd tend to put Golarion in there too, yup, at least 1e Golarion. Runelord Sorshen spontaneously deciding to be non-evil and non-lustful in Return of the Runelords felt very odd* to me, and I've not followed the setting in 2e.
*Although I did stick with it in my own Runelords campaign, I just don't obligate the players to side with her.
If you use phrases like "kids nowadays" then you are probably out of touch with what kids nowadays want.Generic is perfectly fine. I just don't see it as a particularly "2021" setting. Then again, I don't think what the "kids nowadays" want from high fantasy is something markedly different from standard high fantasy convention. Hence, no "sea change"
Definitely but I don't see any indications that any group of 5E players (whether 20-somethings or 40-somethings or whatever) particularly wants their D&D settings to be like that.Outside of D&D I think the most popular fantasy settings tend to be stuff like The Witcher and Game of Thrones, mostly not super dark but certainly much darker than D&D's current direction.
I think fantasy TV is like DC superhero movies. The film makers think that for them to appeal to older audiences they have to be super-dark, when really, what the audience wants in Marvel.Definitely but I don't see any indications that any group of 5E players (whether 20-somethings or 40-somethings or whatever) particularly wants their D&D settings to be like that.
Otherwise darker settings would sell like hot cakes, wouldn't they? And in fact they don't. For your theory to work, there would have to be this unmet demand for that stuff. But the demand is absolutely met. Even beyond D&D, there are tons of "dark fantasy" RPGs, Shadow of the Demon Lord being an obvious one. Are they hideously successful? Not really. They do fine. It certainly looks like demand is met there.
So I would say that evidence suggests that the people who watch GoT and The Witcher, do not want to play out GoT or The Witcher in a TTRPG. YMMV.
EDIT - As an aside, whilst it didn't blow up the world, the Shadow and Bone show for Netflix is based on a series which roughly Witcher-dark, and which shows perhaps a take which is closer to how TTRPG doing "dark fantasy" in those kinds of settings might look. It was successful but I don't think a mind-blowing hit.
Further, I think a lot of it on TV is just about spin. Like, look at the Wheel of Time show. Firstly it's pretty great, I was shocked, the books are dull, but the show starts "Eh" and becomes "HELL YEAH!", but the show FEELS like 10x darker than the books. It isn't. It's the roughly the same events, but for some reason seeing them, hearing them, all that - wow that's a lot scarier than reading them (this is not always the case - I think it shows a limitation Jordan had as a writer but feel free to disagree). So what I would call "normal fantasy" in terms of darkness - WoT - comes across as pretty damn scary. I mean I think you could spin the FR or Eberron to be pretty "dark" if you wanted to. It's just on how you describe things and what you choose to happen.
MCU stuff definitely consistently feels more like superhero RPGs I've actually played with actual players lol, what with all the quips and backslapping and rivalry and general "party of adventurers" vibe they often have.I think fantasy TV is like DC superhero movies. The film makers think that for them to appeal to older audiences they have to be super-dark, when really, what the audience wants in Marvel.