D&D 5E Mike Mearls interview - states that they may be getting off of the 2 AP/year train.

[PMárk]

Well, I guess then I won't know what happened, for example with Myth Drannor after Shade falling on it in details anytime soon...

Sigh. It's sad. Every time I engage in this kind of conversations, I just get slapped with the fact that WotC's current publication philosophy is just not for me and I get more and more disinterested in 5e. It's really sad, because I had such high hopes for it at the beginning.

 

[robus]

Well, I guess then I won't know what happened, for example with Myth Drannor after Shade falling on it in details anytime soon...

Sigh. It's sad. Every time I engage in this kind of conversations, I just get slapped with the fact that WotC's current publication philosophy is just not for me and I get more and more disinterested in 5e. It's really sad, because I had such high hopes for it at the beginning.

This is what is puzzling me. 5e is not FR. Imagine if all the fans of all the settings wanted this level if investment in their beloved settings? WotC would be fully occupied just documenting the ongoing histories for these places and not actually producing material to game with!

 

[MechaTarrasque]

And how do we know that for certain until a new FRCS is out? Overall a lot of it may seem the same, but as it hasn't been detailed, we can't be sure. Outside the area covered in SCAG, much of the Forgotten Realms is the Schrödinger's cat of settings - we can theorize whether, say, certain towns are alive or dead, but until the metaphorical box is opened, we can't be sure...

Think of the opportunity this gives you. If you take the PC's to a town, and later it turns out that officially it was different from what you did, have the players have the PC's mention the town to a NPC in a session, and when the NPC acts like they are totally crazy "because everyone knows town X is like this, not like what you are talking about", and you have an instant quest with solid emotional attachment (how dare someone mess with us like that?).

 

[robus]

Think of the opportunity this gives you. If you take the PC's to a town, and later it turns out that officially it was different from what you did, have the players have the PC's mention the town to a NPC in a session, and when the NPC acts like they are totally crazy "because everyone knows town X is like this, not like what you are talking about", and you have an instant quest with solid emotional attachment (how dare someone mess with us like that?).

Or in the immortal words Idina Menzel "Let it go... let it go..."

 

[Azzy]

Or in the immortal words Idina Menzel "Let it go... let it go..."

I think everyone in this thread could use a dose of that.

 

[Jester David]

And how do we know that for certain until a new FRCS is out? Overall a lot of it may seem the same, but as it hasn't been detailed, we can't be sure. Outside the area covered in SCAG, much of the Forgotten Realms is the Schrödinger's cat of settings - we can theorize whether, say, certain towns are alive or dead, but until the metaphorical box is opened, we can't be sure...

1) They've told people to use the old material
2) The whole design goal of the Sundering was to roll back as many of the changes as possible
3) If they don't release material that contradicts the old... does it matter? If WotC never opens the box, you get to choose if the cat is alive or dead.

 

[PMárk]

This is what is puzzling me. 5e is not FR. Imagine if all the fans of all the settings wanted this level if investment in their beloved settings? WotC would be fully occupied just documenting the ongoing histories for these places and not actually producing material to game with!

Thing is, I'd be happy not with just FR, but with several settings, but they're doing none of them.

As I said before, I tend to like rpgs for their settings, the two are inseparable to me. I'm not really into universal systems, or I'm into them IF they have one or more interesting and detailed setting I'd be interested in. I know it might be strange to someone who prefers homebrewing, but that's how I choose rpgs. I was interested in D&D because of the settings. In PF because of Golarion., In WoD and SR because of, well, WoD and SR. In CoC because of Lovecraft. In 7th sea because of the faux-16th/17th century Europe Théa. Without settings, a game is just an empty shell of mechanics to me. Yes, you could use it to write your own stories, but it's not enough to maintain my long-term interest (and even initially interesting, but frozen-in-amber settings have a harder time to maintain my long-term interest).

It doesn't mean I'm against homebrewing, on the contrary, I like it. It's just, at first sight an rpg will need stuff above the system to catch my eye. Also, as I wrote earlier, a big part of enjoying rpg-brands to me, besides actual gaming and preparing, is reading interesting stories, be they novels, comics, or setting guides and seeing the setting through the inhabitant's eyes and geting to know cool characters I could connect.

Simply put, I'm much less intereseted in an rpg, if it's just the game, without added interesting fluff, it's just how I work and 5e is severely lacking on those parts this far, so my interest dwindles more and more.

Honestly, I'd have said "this game is not for me, but I'm happy it's the perfect one for some" and walk away, only taking a look time-to-time, just as I did with NWoD, if it wouldn't have killed some of my favorite settings and novel series I liked with the same sweep. It's just stings a lot more, because of it. I skipped 4e almost entirely and went to PF, but still did read the novels, now D&D has a system I actually more-or-less like, but it became empty in every other regard.

 

[robus]

Thing is, I'd be happy not with just FR, but with several settings, but they're doing none of them.

As I said before, I tend to like rpgs for their settings, the two are inseparable to me. I'm not really into universal systems, or I'm into them IF they have one or more interesting and detailed setting I'd be interested in. I know it might be strange to someone who prefers homebrewing, but that's how I choose rpgs. I was interested in D&D because of the settings. In PF because of Golarion., In WoD and SR because of, well, WoD and SR. In CoC because of Lovecraft. In 7th sea because of the faux-16th/17th century Europe Théa. Without settings, a game is just an empty shell of mechanics to me. Yes, you could use it to write your own stories, but it's not enough to maintain my long-term interest (and even initially interesting, but frozen-in-amber settings have a harder time to maintain my long-term interest).

It doesn't mean I'm against homebrewing, on the contrary, I like it. It's just, at first sight an rpg will need stuff above the system to catch my eye. Also, as I wrote earlier, a big part of enjoying rpg-brands to me, besides actual gaming and preparing, is reading interesting stories, be they novels, comics, or setting guides and seeing the setting through the inhabitant's eyes and geting to know cool characters I could connect.

Simply put, I'm much less intereseted in an rpg, if it's just the game, without added interesting fluff, it's just how I work and 5e is severely lacking on those parts this far, so my interest dwindles more and more.

Honestly, I'd have said "this game is not for me, but I'm happy it's the perfect one for some" and walk away, only taking a look time-to-time, just as I did with NWoD, if it wouldn't have killed some of my favorite settings and novel series I liked with the same sweep. It's just stings a lot more, because of it. I skipped 4e almost entirely and went to PF, but still did read the novels, now D&D has a system I actually more-or-less like, but it became empty in every other regard.

So this might be a bit of a leap (especially if fantasy is your thing) but FFGs Star Wars would seem to be a system that would give you what you're looking for? An RPG within a huge and ongoing canon...

 

[bmfrosty]

Thing is, I'd be happy not with just FR, but with several settings, but they're doing none of them.

As I said before, I tend to like rpgs for their settings, the two are inseparable to me. I'm not really into universal systems, or I'm into them IF they have one or more interesting and detailed setting I'd be interested in. I know it might be strange to someone who prefers homebrewing, but that's how I choose rpgs. I was interested in D&D because of the settings. In PF because of Golarion., In WoD and SR because of, well, WoD and SR. In CoC because of Lovecraft. In 7th sea because of the faux-16th/17th century Europe Théa. Without settings, a game is just an empty shell of mechanics to me. Yes, you could use it to write your own stories, but it's not enough to maintain my long-term interest (and even initially interesting, but frozen-in-amber settings have a harder time to maintain my long-term interest).

It doesn't mean I'm against homebrewing, on the contrary, I like it. It's just, at first sight an rpg will need stuff above the system to catch my eye. Also, as I wrote earlier, a big part of enjoying rpg-brands to me, besides actual gaming and preparing, is reading interesting stories, be they novels, comics, or setting guides and seeing the setting through the inhabitant's eyes and geting to know cool characters I could connect.

Simply put, I'm much less intereseted in an rpg, if it's just the game, without added interesting fluff, it's just how I work and 5e is severely lacking on those parts this far, so my interest dwindles more and more.

Honestly, I'd have said "this game is not for me, but I'm happy it's the perfect one for some" and walk away, only taking a look time-to-time, just as I did with NWoD, if it wouldn't have killed some of my favorite settings and novel series I liked with the same sweep. It's just stings a lot more, because of it. I skipped 4e almost entirely and went to PF, but still did read the novels, now D&D has a system I actually more-or-less like, but it became empty in every other regard.

Why would you think that they've decided what's happened to any part of the forgotten realms that they haven't already published in a book? Maybe they want to leave it open so that they can decide what happened to suit a future story. Maybe they'll decide that some place or another has been occupied by some organization/species/outer plane for several years since they detailed it, but if they write a campaign setting that details it, they won't be able to do so? It gives them the luxury of leaving everything in the box with schrodinger's cat until they decide to what it needs to have been.

 

[PMárk]

So this might be a bit of a leap (especially if fantasy is your thing) but FFGs Star Wars would seem to be a system that would give you what you're looking for? An RPG within a huge and ongoing canon...

Thanks for trying to be helpful! I appreciate it, truly.

Honestly, I'm not really a big SW fan. I don't dislike it either, just that I'm not really into space opera and sci-fi. Starfinder didn't get my interest either, 40k, the same.

I'm fairly new to SR, so there's a lot of stuff to enjoy right now and it's ongoing, with all the things I like. I'm also curious what the new WW will do with WoD, I hope as hard as I can it'll be good! And there's always PF.

So, it's not like I don't have stuff I like, but I miss the things that connected me to D&D and it's worlds. :/