D&D 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.

 

[pkt77242]

While I agree that default DL isn’t very gritty, it depends on the time period. Play in a campaign right after the Cataclysm and it can be very gritty.

Dragonlance? Gritty?!?!

 

[Mercurius]

Dragonlance? Gritty?!?!

Strung-out elven kings, acid-burned plainsmen, evolutinarily regressive dwarves, "fewmasters," creepy bunny stories, and horny death knights...it all depends upon how you look at it.

 

[Zardnaar]

It may also be that there are a variety of play styles and preferences. Some of the OSR/traditionalist crowd hates Dragonlance because of its epic story line which can be perceived of as railroading, and see it as the big downfall of D&D (thus 1974-83 is Golden Age of "Pure D&D"). I'm a big umbrella kind of person, though, enjoying both epic storylines and sandboxing, and everything in-between. More importantly, I think phrases like "plays far better" really is a subjective thing; the more fun you and your group are having, the better it plays.

You don't have to be a purist.
They heralded in a period of crap adventure design from TSR.

You don't find many great adventures from 85-95 outside Dungeon.

Good adventures didn't really return until late 2E. Even then it was a handful.

Paizo started the good adventure revival that WotC basically copied.

Not everything Paizo/WotC have done with adventures is great but they're still better generally than the dreck from 85-95.

And I like 2E. Adventures aren't a strong point though.

 

[Rygar]

You don't have to be a purist.
They heralded in a period of crap adventure design from TSR.

You don't find many great adventures from 85-95 outside Dungeon.

Good adventures didn't really return until late 2E. Even then it was a handful.

Paizo started the good adventure revival that WotC basically copied.

Not everything Paizo/WotC have done with adventures is great but they're still better generally than the dreck from 85-95.

And I like 2E. Adventures aren't a strong point though.

I think that's a bit revisionist. To counterpoint...

• Dragonlance wasn't the cause of "Crap adventure design", and I don't think that's a universally held fact. It was a period of shifting to a new view of how to create adventures. Yes, the business plan wasn't great and ended up killing TSR, but that wasn't due to Dragonlance.
• One could argue that good adventures didn't really return until late 3rd edition, and then only under Paizo's guidance. TSR was spamming product as fast as it could to try and generate revenue, and WOTC's material even today is pretty bad when compared to Pathfinder.
• It's interesting you state that Paizo started the good adventure revival, as most of their adventure paths are as railroaded as Dragonlance was. Your party has no choice but to fight a battle and win in Skulls and Shackles to get a map to find an island, you cannot proceed the adventure without doing that. You have to search several libraries in Mummy's Mask to progress the adventure, there's no way to bypass it, and it's built on a system guaranteed to bore many parties. If anything, Paizo copied Margaret and Tracey, and tossed in a few semi-open spaces in most of their paths.

Dragonlance is probably their strongest potential offering at this point. It aligns much more closely with the current climate in RPGs than any other setting, it features classes that have a lot of general appeal, it has a metric ton of lore upon which to base the setting, it has a rational explanation for Dragonborn, it's marketable to Hollywood for wide demographic appeal, and it's presently set up for a compelling storyline.

Quite frankly, it's mind boggling to me why they haven't released it yet. I'm firmly convinced WOTC hates money and success.

 

[Zardnaar]

I think that's a bit revisionist. To counterpoint...

• Dragonlance wasn't the cause of "Crap adventure design", and I don't think that's a universally held fact. It was a period of shifting to a new view of how to create adventures. Yes, the business plan wasn't great and ended up killing TSR, but that wasn't due to Dragonlance.
• One could argue that good adventures didn't really return until late 3rd edition, and then only under Paizo's guidance. TSR was spamming product as fast as it could to try and generate revenue, and WOTC's material even today is pretty bad when compared to Pathfinder.
• It's interesting you state that Paizo started the good adventure revival, as most of their adventure paths are as railroaded as Dragonlance was. Your party has no choice but to fight a battle and win in Skulls and Shackles to get a map to find an island, you cannot proceed the adventure without doing that. You have to search several libraries in Mummy's Mask to progress the adventure, there's no way to bypass it, and it's built on a system guaranteed to bore many parties. If anything, Paizo copied Margaret and Tracey, and tossed in a few semi-open spaces in most of their paths.

Dragonlance is probably their strongest potential offering at this point. It aligns much more closely with the current climate in RPGs than any other setting, it features classes that have a lot of general appeal, it has a metric ton of lore upon which to base the setting, it has a rational explanation for Dragonborn, it's marketable to Hollywood for wide demographic appeal, and it's presently set up for a compelling storyline.

Quite frankly, it's mind boggling to me why they haven't released it yet. I'm firmly convinced WOTC hates money and success.

I'm thinking pre Pathfinder more Paizo dungeon era Age of Worms through to Rise of the Runelords was a good run.

Late 2E you had Night Below and some other well regarded adventures.

Dragonlance started the narrative heavy ones that bled over into say Darksun.

You don't find to many well regarded adventures 86-95 or so. There's the occasional one sure such as B10 and Dungeon had some good ones.

 

[Mercurius]

Quite frankly, it's mind boggling to me why they haven't released it yet. I'm firmly convinced WOTC hates money and success.

Yeah, they're obviously struggling mightily.

Sarcasm aside, I do agree that Dragonlance could be really successful in this era because it would be well-suited for the type of multi-media offering that they're building towards. I've often though that the Chronicles would translate well to a TV series...if done well, that is.

 

[Parmandur]

Yeah, they're obviously struggling mightily.

Sarcasm aside, I do agree that Dragonlance could be really successful in this era because it would be well-suited for the type of multi-media offering that they're building towards. I've often though that the Chronicles would translate well to a TV series...if done well, that is.

I think that a Tales from the Yawning Portal conversion of the original Modules (DL1-4, 6-10, and 12-14, something like that?) is something in their plans. Easier said than done, since my back of the napkin calculation for just the original Modules in 5E book form is ~372 pages...

 

[Zardnaar]

I think that a Tales from the Yawning Portal conversion of the original Modules (DL1-4, 6-10, and 12-14, something like that?) is something in their plans. Easier said than done, since my back of the napkin calculation for just the original Modules in 5E book form is ~372 pages...

They won't be doing Dragonlance anytime soon.

Biggest problem is they blew up the world to many times.

 

[Parmandur]

They won't be doing Dragonlance anytime soon.

Biggest problem is they blew up the world to many times.

Never say never.

All they need to do on the metaplot front is reboot to the original version, circa 1984. Release a 5E version of the original Modules. Unleash the DMsGuild.

 

[darjr]

They won't be doing Dragonlance anytime soon.

Biggest problem is they blew up the world to many times.

Why would that stop them?

Also I think the whole “Dragonlance ruined D&D” thing is very overplayed and kinda silly. It clearly didn’t.