D&D 5E Mike Mearls on Settings

Bad Fox

First Post
I doubt very much, if we're talking timelines, that Greyhawk would be the next setting they release. If we're going by UA for clues, Ebberon stuff went on UA forever ago. (That obvs doesn't mean it's first either, I'm just pointing out that Mike releasing a GH UA doesn't necessarily mean it's next up to bat.)

Strongly agree. The tone of what Mearls was saying in the interview seems to indicate that a Greyhawk release is almost definitely not coming in the near future, even though he might personally want that.

Posting a Greyhawk UA sounds more like him indulging his love for Greyhawk, and maybe doing research for potential products further down the line.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Mercurius

Legend
I'm thinking that a large reason for the success of 5E is that it appeals to both old and new gamers alike. It harkens back to old school flavor and rule systems, maintains the design consistency of 3E/4E, but is also simple enough for new players to start. In that sense, focusing on Greyhawk would be a mistake, perhaps a colossal one. Let's be honest: Greyhawk is mainly beloved by older gamers, those who came of age during the halycon 70s and the boom era 80s. It has a lot of nostalgic cachet, but probably not a lot of appeal to younger generations and new and future gamers. Certain aspects of its flavor (e.g. its names, as someone mentioned) are just too idiosyncratic.

I do have a few suggestions of possible approaches that could be taken. It seems the basic problem is two-fold: whether it is worth the resources to allocate to a setting, and which setting to choose. I think the answer to the first is probably not; the second is unanswerable. This is probably why we haven't seen a setting yet, aside from the SCAG. But there are other options.

Several years ago--I think in the early days of 4E--I said that I would love to see a hardcover book called Worlds of D&D, or something like that, which described every official D&D setting, major and minor, in broad terms. If it was 320 pages, you could have longer sections--32 pages--for a few choice settings (FR, Greyhawk, Dark Sun, Eberron); shorter sections--16 pages--for the secondary settings (Dragonlance, Spelljammer, Mystara, etc)--and then very short sections--8 pages--for the minor ones (e.g. Al-Qadim, Jakandor, Ghostwalk, etc).

Of course there are problems with that approach: For one, you just won't be able to go into enough detail to make the settings all that useful, and it doesn't help fans of specific settings who don't want to buy a $50 book just for 16 pages. That leads me to the second approach:

Write a series of Classic Setting Gazetteers, probably not needing to be more than 64 pages long, which provide a guide to how to play the setting, a few specific rules, broad info on the world and detail on a starting location (e.g. Shadowdale). Finally, each gazetteer would have a few page appendix that described the publication history and info about what older products would be particularly useful for more information.

To me this would be the ideal approach. I'd love to see an aggressive publishing schedule: maybe once every quarter, so four a year. If it is too much work for the skeleton crew at WotC, they could outsource to different publishers like they did with Tyranny of Dragons. I mean, why not? If any of the gazetteers sell really well, they could start a whole line of products. They wouldn't need to do FR, as they already did SCAG. A possible order of publishing might be: Greyhawk, Planescape (Sigil), Nerath (Nentir Vale), Dark Sun, Eberron, Dragonlance, Mystara, Birthright, Spelljammer...or something like that. Not sure Al-Qadim, Ghostwalk, Jakandor, Council of Wyrms, etc, would be necessary.

Anyhow, just dreaming...
 

76512390ag12

First Post
I think the Classic Setting Gazetteers would be excellent. In truth they could be as simple as the MTG crossover documents in playtest, but I think that the settings deserve better than that. I am not sure there is much difference between 64 pages and 128 pages in terms of production time for what are reasonably detailed settings, and I think the idea of sub contracting them to a TPP house would make sense. On that basis maybe Necromancer might be best suited to summarise Greyhawk in 128 pages, with the core maps being redrawn by the house cartographer or even someone totally different like Colin Driver (Glorantha, Talislanta) or Stephanie McAlea (CoC and others). I can see that many people like the idea that GH is an older grimmer setting, so a section that suggests a tweaked ruleset for GH (riffing off ideas in the DMG), a section on GH religions, and, since it's what really makes 5e buzz, different backgrounds and sub classes. Then, and I think this is important, a section on how GH adventures differ, and how to adapt the core FR adventures into GH. Make sure all the maps are for sale elsewhere as hi-res files, open up GH to DMsGuild and then step back and let people have fun with it. It isn't "that different" to FR, since FR clearly follows from GH, and yet that book as a print release and then POD forever could be a nice resource for fan driven fun away from the all encompassing nature of FR. I think, and people may hate me for this, but that might then be it. It would mean future AP and scenario collections would have a core GH book to reference so that the 'use in other settings' section could reference that.
 

Pauln6

Hero
Living Greyhawk was great fun and had some wonderful ideas but it did sadly homogenise the setting a bit too much. Instead if having remote enclaves of human hating wood elves, it gave us every major city with 10% elf population. Instead of a few remote or legendary places of magical learning, or reclusive old cranks teaching one or two gifted pupils, it gave us a well funded wizard school, sorcerer school, and Bard school, each manned by a dozen supremely powerful spell casters in a nation of only a few hundred thousand people. It wallpapered over a lot of the flavour to allow players to play any class with ease, excising most of the racism and sexism except possibly the Rhennee.

In those respects, I hope they take a step back and go old school again. If racism was good enough for Tolkien, it's good enough for me.
 

Remathilis

Legend
Going by Mearls idea that a setting = a type of fantasy.

Forgotten Realms = Default/Kitchen-Sink

Greyhawk = Sword-n-Sorcery/shades of gray

Eberron = pulp adventure/steampunk

Dragonlance = High fantasy

Ravenloft = Gothic/Horror

Dark Sun = Primeval Pulp/Sword and Sandals

Planescape = Strange fantasy


To an extent, Birthright and Mystara could be laid out similar, but I don't see them as popular enough (as much as that pains me) to put in some new book or AP.
 





MerricB

Eternal Optimist
Supporter
For me, there is one compelling difference between Greyhawk and the Forgotten Realms. It is this: Greyhawk has kingdoms. The Forgotten Realms doesn't.

While a strict reading of the whole Realms doesn't support that, when you consider the area that most Forgotten Realms stories occur in, Cormyr is at the south-east corner of that area. It's the only kingdom. Elsewhere? City states - Dalelands, Neverwinter, Waterdeep, Baldur's Gate.

Greyhawk, meanwhile, is a place where nationality can really matter. The map is *filled* with nations, with only a handful of city-states. (Of course, the world is named after one of them!)

This opens it up to a different style of campaign than that of the Forgotten Realms. Of course, that campaign is different to the "explore the dungeon" of classic D&D, and that seen in most of the published adventures.

Cheers!
 

Remove ads

Top