D&D 5E Mearls on other settings

[Charles Rampant]

I wish they'd just hit a reboot button and give us back DL, FR, Greyhawk, Spelljammer, DS with the original materials updated to 5E rules. An 'alternative universe' reset.

These settings worked best when they were introduced and before so many bandaids were applied to them. Take them back to the basics.

I wanted to quote this and ignore the comments about specific settings, since I think that there's a really interesting idea here. While I'm a fan of the depth to be found in the Forgotten Realms, there is a common observation around here that Greyhawk is preferred by some because it lacks that depth - you've got a lot more room to improvise your own details, there is more blank space on the map. It could be observed that many of the settings started out as fairly light touch, more conceptually interesting than super detailed in their own right, but that TSR then ploughed so much effort into developing them that they became overbearing. Dark Sun is not a setting I've read, but I know that it started with a well-regarded boxed set; it was then supported by, among other things, a book on caravans. This seems like the kind of thing that isn't really required; you could indeed say that leaving it at just the initial boxed set, and then having adventures that expanded on stuff as needed, would have been a superior model.

In addition, many of the settings are also obviously doing different things - Ravenloft is gothic horror, and suits a very different kind of adventure than Dark Sun, which is post-apoc fantasy. With the possible exception of the overlapping generic fantasy ones - Forgotten Realms, Greyhawk, Mystara - the settings are all useful to maintain, since Planescape lets you do different things as a writer than Spelljammer does.

Taking this together, we might see that Wizards of the Coast will look upon their currently defunct setting IP, and see a great way to do interesting and different products in the future, in a way that doesn't bloat the market and split their fanbase. Instead of doing a whole game line for Planescape, with a boxed set for every imaginable combination of planes, we will see an adventure that takes place there, or visits it, with the discerning reader directed to the DMsGuild and perhaps an accompanying winter hardback book (Shemeshka's Guide to the Planes, Mordenkainen's Guide to Magic) that contains just enough player-facing setting material to support it. Then if they fancy returning to Ravenloft, say, that's not a big deal; another adventure can be located near Barovia, with perhaps a few links, but without the need for a whole supporting line.

 

[Remathilis]

I get WotC wants to "take it slow" but dammit a toe in water conversion for some of the races, major monsters, and such for the major worlds would be nice. Official "we visit this world in X sup or Y AP" is great for 5+ years down the road, but a few of us just want official warforged stats!

That said, I have a personal theory that when WotC does visit other worlds, you're going to see two design philosophies going forward.

* Each world is going to have a "hook" that can be described in a sentence; "Eberron is pulp/noir exploration and magitech", "Dragonlance is chivalric knights and wizards vs. evil dragons", "Greyhawk is sword-and-sorcery adventure in a morally gray world", etc. Each world will present a clear "theme" or "reason to exist" beyond "Its not Faerun."

* The world will, to the best of their ability, try to retain as much of the Player's Handbook "default" as possible. That is, alternate rules will be played down and the majority of "additions" will end up being races (kender, mul, shifter), subclasses (wizard of high sorcery, gladiator) or backgrounds ("dragonmarked heir, Templar). I also expect few subtractive rules in an attempt to keep the "core" as true as possible (All halflings in Dragonlance use the kender subrace...) so expect dragonborn on Oerth, tieflings on Krynn, and Clerics on Athas.

My theories are mostly based around how Ravenloft was handled in Curse of Strahd; they could have opted for a number of Ravenloft-era rules (spell changes, fear/horror/madness, Power checks) but instead did the minimum (a few cosmetic spell changes beyond the planar travel ban and Resurrection). Hell, they didn't even to re-invent some of them; Fear and Horror are in the 5e DMG! They did it so as to make the game work without much additional info, and I feel they're going to try to do the same with other settings. So I wager that 5e Dragonlance is going to figure out some way of making every PHB class available, 5e Planescape is going to treat the factions like the AL factions, etc.

I know the purists will shriek in rage and horror, but I think when they do move beyond Faerun (and a toe-dip in Ravenloft) that it will error more towards "D&D, with added flavor" rather than "radical rebuild/variant of the D&D system".

 

[robus]

[MENTION=7635]Remathilis[/MENTION] - i think you're on the right track. And that would certainly help to make adventures more portable between settings in the future (they've been suggesting that already)

In fact when I run CoS I'm going to insist on an all human party and a subset of classes to better align with the setting.

 

[JeffB]

Thanks for the link. Bookmarked the page. Interesting read

That article,for me, is just complete D&D gold.

Easter egg-If you look closely at the jpgs you can see a city name that later was hijacked fora infamous AD&D wizard whose abode still strikes fear into the hearts of adventurers...and was recently published again under 5e rules.

 

[Remathilis]

[MENTION=7635]Remathilis[/MENTION] - i think you're on the right track. And that would certainly help to make adventures more portable between settings in the future (they've been suggesting that already)

In fact when I run CoS I'm going to insist on an all human party and a subset of classes to better align with the setting.

I'm probably in the minority in thinking this is a GOOD thing. I remember in the Halcyon days of 2e where every setting had its own variant on a class or race, each with mechanical alterations. For example, a Cleric (not even specialty priests, but BOG STANDARD CLERIC) got different domains in the PHB, Ravenloft, and Forgotten Realms. Athas practically had its own version of the Player's Handbook. The settings usually referenced the PHB, but more than a few of them tended to supersede it in more than just flavor.

Personally, the D&D settings should still reflect D&D first, and then their particular genre or flavor (gothic horror, sword-n-sorcery, pulp action, sword-n-sandal) second. They shouldn't require much more mechanical support than what the SCAG provided (a few races or racial variants, a new class and/or some subclasses, and a few backgrounds, feats, or spells). If the DM wants to emulate the genre further, he can start restricting classes and using DMG variant rules.

 

[JeffB]

I'm probably in the minority in thinking this is a GOOD thing. I remember in the Halcyon days of 2e where every setting had its own variant on a class or race, each with mechanical alterations. For example, a Cleric (not even specialty priests, but BOG STANDARD CLERIC) got different domains in the PHB, Ravenloft, and Forgotten Realms. Athas practically had its own version of the Player's Handbook. The settings usually referenced the PHB, but more than a few of them tended to supersede it in more than just flavor.

Personally, the D&D settings should still reflect D&D first, and then their particular genre or flavor (gothic horror, sword-n-sorcery, pulp action, sword-n-sandal) second. They shouldn't require much more mechanical support than what the SCAG provided (a few races or racial variants, a new class and/or some subclasses, and a few backgrounds, feats, or spells). If the DM wants to emulate the genre further, he can start restricting classes and using DMG variant rules.

I am the opposite. The.situation you describe here for me is like cheap store-brand vanilla ice cream.Wjat makes each setting great, are the differences, not their uniformity. Thats the problem with the Realms. And why WOTC should keep their mitts off the other settings, afaic.

 

[Charles Rampant]

Count me as a vote for light-touch settings, mechanically. The game's classes and races are meant to be generic at their core; having slabs of rules for each setting just to look different (or to practice pointless book keeping, ala Planescape Magic Item rules) simply creates work for no good reason.

 

[Mouseferatu]

Give me differences. Give me Dark Sun with no clerics and cannibal halflings. Give me Eberron with races nobody else has, and a totally different planar system. Give me Ravenloft where anyone not mostly human-looking is likely to be treated like a monster.

A major part of what makes these settings cool is in their differences, their exceptions. I have less than no interest in (for instance) an Athas that could just be an undiscovered desert in the Forgotten Realms or on Oerth. I think that's not just not to my taste, but damaging to the concepts of the settings themselves. I would rather see them not done than done that way.

 

[KahlessNestor]

I'm not the person you were asking, but I would not be surprised in the least if next year's November release was a "guide to the multiverse" sort of thing with short introductions of various settings and their mechanical uniquenesses, followed by opening those settings up for the DM's Guild.

We already know what the release in November is. It's Xanathar's Guide to Everything. New subclasses and other mechanical crunch, not multiversal settings. Without a functional artificer, warforged, mystic, changeling, kalashtar, thri-kreen, etc, they are nowhere close to ready for other settings.

Sent from my SM-G900P using EN World mobile app

 

[Remathilis]

I am the opposite. The.situation you describe here for me is like cheap store-brand vanilla ice cream.Wjat makes each setting great, are the differences, not their uniformity. Thats the problem with the Realms. And why WOTC should keep their mitts off the other settings, afaic.

Give me differences. Give me Dark Sun with no clerics and cannibal halflings. Give me Eberron with races nobody else has, and a totally different planar system. Give me Ravenloft where anyone not mostly human-looking is likely to be treated like a monster.

A major part of what makes these settings cool is in their differences, their exceptions. I have less than no interest in (for instance) an Athas that could just be an undiscovered desert in the Forgotten Realms or on Oerth. I think that's not just not to my taste, but damaging to the concepts of the settings themselves. I would rather see them not done than done that way.

The problem here is that there are so many systems that do those things better than D&D. I mean, Conan the RPG is far better at emulating Sword-and-Sandals than Dark Sun is. Savage Worlds has Eberron beat hands down for Pulp. D&D shouldn't be competing for genre emulation, it should be using genre to flavor D&D assumptions. TSR got itself into a lot of trouble by making settings that by-and-large were incompatible with each other, let alone the core game because it sequestered the audience into buying material only compatible with that world rather than compatible with the game as a whole. A player starting a game on Krynn or Athas shouldn't be hold half of the PHB options are invalid. It shouldn't need a dozen new classes to emulate gladiators, knights, gypsies, or etc when a background + subclass should do just fine.

Basically, if you can't play the setting with the basic-rules options (dwarf, elf, human, halfling, fighter, cleric, wizard, rogue) as options with some minor alterations (like new subclasses or subraces), consider if the setting is really trying to be D&D or is it just trying be a different game with D&D's branding on it.