log in or register to remove this ad

 

5E Is there even a new D&D setting?

Though we’ve been speculating about what the new setting recently pre-announced for D&D might or might not be (Icewind Dale being one suggestion), there's some doubt about whether it exists at all!

The press release that was sent out said:

Fans of D&D will learn all about the new setting and storyline as well as accompanying new products


The web page for the event says:

Fans of D&D will learn all about the new storyline as well as accompanying new products


The word “setting” is missing from the web page, but exists in the press release. The text is the same otherwise.

I don’t know which order the two were written in, or if the latter changed, or if the former contains extra information.
 
Russ Morrissey

Comments


log in or register to remove this ad


Parmandur

Legend
Kind of feel sad for the "Odyssey of the Dragonlords" folk, who created a Greek-inspired D&D5e setting only for the grandpa WoTC to create their own and very closely titled "Mythic Odyssey of Theros".
Why feel sorry for them? They are actually employees of WotC now, even. Actually, we've hypothesized around here previously that, given the timelines of them being hired for the WotC Austin studio and the Kick-starting of Dragonlords, that they might have known Theros was coming and we're setting themselves up to take advantage of that.
 


Von Ether

Adventurer
Kudos to whoever is keeping on top of that list! It seem pretty update, good job!
 


Just them? There's another five Greek-themed D&D settings so far in addition to those two. I feel sorry for the ones you didn't mention!

So what kind of chronological order do we have for the release of these and the Theros MtG card sets? Were any of these a thing before Theros was added to Magic?
 



darjr

I crit!
Also, to be honest, I'm enjoying @Morrus' obvious enjoyment quite a bit. It's a win-win.
The humor is kinda meta too. I think the announcement was made in such a way to tease, and Morrus was, and so he teased back, which probably lead to them teasing more. And here we are.
 


Paragon Lost

Terminally Lost
Supporter
Could it be the Hickman based project hinted at by Perkins? Probably Dragonlance?
I'd be thrilled to see a return of Dragonlance for 5e. As long as they put the same amount of effort and detail that they did into the AD&D 1st edition version. I'd buy everything they put out for that like I did the 1e version.
 

I'd be thrilled to see a return of Dragonlance for 5e. As long as they put the same amount of effort and detail that they did into the AD&D 1st edition version. I'd buy everything they put out for that like I did the 1e version.
Dragonlance is big on the named heroes. From the novels. Even beyond that of the Realms. 5e has moved beyond the asinine alignments of Dragonlance. Justification of actions based on alignments in Dragonlance is asinine.
 
Last edited:


Zardnaar

Legend
This is why I just don't care.

Whatever it is will be released when it arrives. Speculation is pointless.

Sure it might be fun to speculate but I prefer spending that time doing something else. Like colonize Europe in EUIV as Africa or Incas.
 

pkt77242

Explorer
Why do you feel the need to piss in other’s Cheerios?

I for one would love a Dragonlance setting for 5E set either during the War of the Lance or right after.

Dragonlance is big on the named heroes. From the novels. Even beyond that of the Realms. 5e has moved beyond the asinine alignments of Dragonlance. Justification of actions based on alignments in Dragonlance is asinine.
 

Umbran

Mod Squad
Staff member
Justification of actions based on alignments in Dragonlance is asinine.
Mod Note:
How about, in this time of rather high stress among pretty much everyone around you, you approach discussions with a touch more kindness, and about 75% less insulting language? Not that you have to like everything, but please remember that your personal taste is not objective, and other people like things.
 
Last edited:

Mercurius

Legend
If I log in to watch their stream on the day to find the 'new' setting they talked about was one we've known about for months, I'll be pretty disappointed.
To be frank, that's on you (being disappointed). I mean, I get it: I too get a bit excited when I see the word "new" with regards to a D&D product, especially a setting. But a few things to consider:

1. There will be more settings. In a 20-month span, we've gotten four setting books--Ravnica, Eberron Wildemount and soon Theros. This implies that not only are settings doing well for them, but we'll see more in the years to come. My guess is that we'll see one or even two a year (or maybe three every two years), perhaps alternating classic D&D settings and Magic settings, which are "new" (to D&D, and many of us) for all intents and purposes.

2. While I don't think it is set-in-stone that what they meant is Theros, it is the most obvious answer and anything other than that is pretty groundless and requires wild speculation. Occam's Razor and all that.

3. I would suggest to be open to surprises, but don't expect them. Ravnica was a surprise. A full treatment of Wildemount was a surprise. Theros was a surprise. WotC seems to like surprising us and doing things a bit differently than in previous editions (e.g. Volo's and Mordenkainen's), so I, ahh, wouldn't be surprised if at some point they surprise us with something totally unexpected.

Now they could have meant Icewind Dale (or whatever the new FR story arc is) as the "new setting," and then withdrawn that as it was misleading. But we already know that we're getting a new setting in July, so it just makes sense that that is what they are referring to when they say that they are going to talk about the "new setting."
 

Paragon Lost

Terminally Lost
Supporter
Mod Note:
How about, in this time of rather high stress among pretty much everyone around you, you approach discussions with a touch more kindness, and about 75% less insulting language? Not that you have to like everything, but please remember that your personal taste is not objective, and other people like things.
I'll admit I was more than a bit confused by the strong reaction to my mention how much I'd love to see a 5e update to Dragonlance setting. At the time it was coming out I snagged every module and book as they were released. Promptly incorporating much of the material into my Palladium rpg campaign and two years later using a lot of the material for my move to GURPs. A lot of great stuff to borrow from the game modules.
 

Mercurius

Legend
Dragonlance is big on the named heroes. From the novels. Even beyond that of the Realms. 5e has moved beyond the asinine alignments of Dragonlance. Justification of actions based on alignments in Dragonlance is asinine.
Remember that it is a game, a fantasy game at that, which is based more on mythological archetypes than in trying to simulate real-world morality. Nothing wrong with doing just that, but playing a fantasy game in a mythic manner--with evil and good, law and chaos--isn't asinine.

As for Dragonlance, I have been re-appreciating it of late, in particular its ability to stay close to vanilla D&D, but with distinctive twists. Whereas GH and FR both seemed designed as sandboxes for D&D stories to take place, Krynn was built around a specific epic tale, and thus in some ways has a more novelistic quality that makes it distinct from other D&D settings. I actually never RPGed in it, but loved the Chronicles and Legends as a kid and bought the later setting material. If WotC were to do a Dragonlance story arc or setting book, it would be quite welcome, in my view.
 

Mythological Figures & Maleficent Monsters

Advertisement1

Mythological Figures & Maleficent Monsters

Advertisement2

Advertisement4

Top