D&D 5E New D&D Player Survey!

Snarf Zagyg

Notorious Liquefactionist
I've never considered Greyhawk, Forgotten Realms, or Dragonlance as unique to be their own settings. Certainly you can just shoehorn the best parts of Greyhawk into a continent of Forgotten Realms. Have the Free City be a rival to Waterdeep or something. Let your characters see both places - why not?

Wait ... were you a product manager of TSR in the 90s?

Now I am become ABEIR-TORIL, the destroyer of CAMPAIGN SETTINGS!
 

log in or register to remove this ad


Retreater

Legend
Wait ... were you a product manager of TSR in the 90s?

Now I am become ABEIR-TORIL, the destroyer of CAMPAIGN SETTINGS!
My presentation of settings tends to be smaller locales, so there wouldn't be a big leap in logic to be adventuring on the Sword Coast then travel a few weeks into the Cairn Hills. Or come across a crashed airship from distant Sharn.
And many times I'd have the party stumble into the mists of Ravenloft.
I don't think most players are overly concerned with fidelity to campaign worlds.
 


Snarf Zagyg

Notorious Liquefactionist
You could run a game based on ether property set in the Forgotten Realms.

That's ... kind of the problem. Sure, you can get something that can sorta do everything ....

100810_giant_swiss_army_knife_1.jpg


But is this the tool that you actually want to use for everything? :)
 



payn

Legend
That's ... kind of the problem. Sure, you can get something that can sorta do everything ....

100810_giant_swiss_army_knife_1.jpg


But is this the tool that you actually want to use for everything? :)
I think the cat is out of the bag on settings for D&D. Paizo took this route with Golarion, and it works pretty well. I know some folks dont like kitchen sink settings, but if you set it up well, you can run entire themed campaigns in any particular corner of the setting. Sandboxing can work too because you will never get bored of your choices. I personally found it much easier to keep up with too. YMMV.
 

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
You could run a game based on ether property set in the Forgotten Realms.
And on Dark Sun. I mean, you COULD run those in pretty much any setting if you put your mind towards it. Neither of those two cities fit the Realms, though. Both the Kings Landing and Minis Tirith are in settings that are low magic, which neither the Realms or Greyhawk fit, but the Realms the least of the two. That shows two things. First, Both the Kings Landing and Minis Tirith have different flavors, despite being similar in genre. Second, there is a difference in the flavor between the Realms and Greyhawk, or one wouldn't fit those two cities better than the other, despite neither being a good fit.

Different flavors of vanilla matter. :)
 

FitzTheRuke

Legend
I never know how to answer these things. How do I separate myself as a gamer from myself as a retailer? As a retailer, I spend ~$40,000 a year on D&D books, but I don't keep them for myself. Also, running PBP games here, I "play" D&D every day, so "when was the last time you played" is a funny question for me. I also find it amusing when they ask "was your first D&D purchase physical or digital" - there wasn't such a thing as digital product when I first bought D&D stuff!

I agree with you posters that would fill out surveys all day long if it resulted in ULTIMATE D&D.
 

Snarf Zagyg

Notorious Liquefactionist
I think the cat is out of the bag on settings for D&D. Paizo took this route with Golarion, and it works pretty well. I know some folks dont like kitchen sink settings, but if you set it up well, you can run entire themed campaigns in any particular corner of the setting. Sandboxing can work too because you will never get bored of your choices. I personally found it much easier to keep up with too. YMMV.

Yeah. I don't care for that. I prefer settings that have a point of view. Give me an Eberron, Dark Sun, Nentir Vale, or any setting that provides ... a setting ... over the Forgotten Realms at this point. And yes, I include GH as one that provide a point of view.

Again, I understand that there are people that enjoy FR, and I appreciate that they do- they are certainly getting content (and good for them!). But that's not my preferred setting, simply because I don't want everything all together. YMMV.
 

Dragonlance returns not only for the TTRPG but also other marketing products. Even we could see new fantasy romance novels.

GH hasn't got a long metaplot, but the alternate: Oerths Aerth, Earth, Oerth, Uerth, and Yarth, can be potential spin-off. About the Greyspace: Edil can works as an ersatz version of elemental air plane, and Conatha as "elemental water plane for low level characters". Some zones of Gnibile could be the softer version of fire elemental plane.
 
Last edited:

payn

Legend
Yeah. I don't care for that. I prefer settings that have a point of view. Give me an Eberron, Dark Sun, Nentir Vale, or any setting that provides ... a setting ... over the Forgotten Realms at this point. And yes, I include GH as one that provide a point of view.

Again, I understand that there are people that enjoy FR, and I appreciate that they do- they are certainly getting content (and good for them!). But that's not my preferred setting, simply because I don't want everything all together. YMMV.
I know, most people do, however, its very difficult for a producer. I mean, every time D&D goes through an edition churn they have to do the same song and dance. Release a default which is likely FR, and then slowly release every flavor setting over the following years. Pathfinder, on the other hand, makes some minor updates to account for mechanics and keeps the ball rolling.

I was weary of Golarion, at first, but the Inner Sea Guide and decade worth of supplements has really fleshed out this setting. You can do anything and its pretty easy to ignore that you have peanut butter in the chocolate. I've come around to the idea, especially with how quality of various settings has varied a lot over the years for D&D settings. YMMV.
 

deganawida

Adventurer
And on Dark Sun. I mean, you COULD run those in pretty much any setting if you put your mind towards it. Neither of those two cities fit the Realms, though. Both the Kings Landing and Minis Tirith are in settings that are low magic, which neither the Realms or Greyhawk fit, but the Realms the least of the two. That shows two things. First, Both the Kings Landing and Minis Tirith have different flavors, despite being similar in genre. Second, there is a difference in the flavor between the Realms and Greyhawk, or one wouldn't fit those two cities better than the other, despite neither being a good fit.

Different flavors of vanilla matter. :)

I'd say as well that neither are particularly suited to D&D's strengths, unless the intent of putting them in there is to recreate the famous battles. Particularly with Tolkien, combat is not emphasized. Oh, how I wonder how perception of high fantasy would have differed had Leaf, by Niggle had been recognized as Tolkien's superior story.
 

Sooo.

A random internet survey that may very well due to its length turn away most of the players that might have otherwise been interested in taking it…

I have no idea what Wotc thinks could possibly be useful about that.
They've given out a few surveys like this, and still do. I'm not sure if your assessment is true to reality.
 



Snarf Zagyg

Notorious Liquefactionist
The purpose of a setting is not to be enjoyed, it's to provide a background against which the game can be enjoyed.

Sure thing boss!

I mean, I consider the setting part of the game that is enjoyed, to the extent that, for example, a game set and run in Dark Sun will be different than one in Krynn, but you can make the distinctions in your mind that matter to you.

It is not a distinction I accept for what I do. :)
 

FrogReaver

As long as i get to be the frog
They've given out a few surveys like this, and still do. I'm not sure if your assessment is true to reality.
Because they do the survey they must be getting something useful out if it? NO! Because they do the survey they must think they are getting something useful out of it.

But if a survey only self selects the D&D players that are willing to spend an hour on a survey all you are really finding out is what the population of d&d players that hear about and are willing to do an hour long survey believe/feel in relation to D&D.

I’m can’t see what data about that kind of population of players is going usefully to tell you.
 

Blue

Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal
I was weary of Golarion, at first, but the Inner Sea Guide and decade worth of supplements has really fleshed out this setting. You can do anything and its pretty easy to ignore that you have peanut butter in the chocolate. I've come around to the idea, especially with how quality of various settings has varied a lot over the years for D&D settings. YMMV.
It's interesting how people can have valid but contradictory opinions. A "decade worth of supplements" is a huge negative if I was running. Much of communication is shorthand. If I tell you "it's a three story house" there are a whole list of assumptions you can reasonably make - it likely has a kitchen, bedrooms, etc. But maybe you need to ask if it's a grand estate or a run down tenement.

If I say I'm running the Forgotten Realms. That's a shorthand. Unless I say otherwise, players can have expectations about Waterdeep, the Ten Towns, Cormyr, Elminster, the Harpers, the Zhents, Balder's Gate, the Cult of the Dragon, etc. And if they know somethng I don't, what I mean when I say something and what they get out of it can differ greatly. Especially with how much the lore has been broken up between different supplements, and for some settings novels and other non-setting books.

Sure, I can say "this is the FR but X, Y and Z" - which again brings us to points where I don't know something to know it has an expectation.

I much prefer broad-strokes-only settings and homebrew, where unknowns become "is this a grand estate or a worn down tenement", as opposed to players making assumptions and potentially having to rewind and retcon because I was tripped up in my job as the window for the players into the world.

I see the other side - a rich world, lots of hooks, players excited to see sights they have heard of and possibly having a shared short-hand that contains multitudes of detail. It's not wrong at all. But it's wrong for me.
 

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top