D&D 5E (2024) Preferences in a New Official 5.5e Specific Setting

[LuisCarlos17f]

If WotC wanted to bet for xuanhuan (Chinese fantasy) this can't be simplely a clone of Kara-tur. Players wanted interesting factions like the clans from Rokugan/Legend of the five Rings. It had to can create the feeling you are visiting a far land. The risk is if something happen in the real life then this could become "taboo".

Other option could be a postapocalypse style Dark Sun spin-off, maybe a new wildspace

 

[Cadence]

A post-apocalyptic game is one of my top choices in general .. but I don't know think so with the restriction of using everything in the PHB, etc...

WIth that restriction, I can imagine a Heroic Wuxia+Steampunk mash up being a lot of fun.

 

[Corinnguard]

Dark Sun could be seen as a post-apocalyptic setting thanks to the Cleansing Wars and Rajaat the Warbringer.

 

[Uni-the-Unicorn!]

Heh. Fair enough. I can't even imagine what a 2024 Low Magic, Low Fantasy setting would look like. This is very much not the system I would use for that setting.

Oh it is very easy. It is mostly just an exercise in subtraction/ removal. It doesn’t get much easier than that IMO!

 

[Uni-the-Unicorn!]

Low magic to me is how I described it. Three half-caster classes running around isn't low magic magic to me.

When we play low magic (which wr pretty much always do), we still allow magic classes. The conceit is that magic is very rare and hard to come by (spells and magic items) If the PCs are a magical class they are basically unique (or nearly so) within the setting. We don’t technically limit classes, but we only ever see fighters, rogues, rangers (spell less), and wizards. Typically, 3-5 of non-magic classes and 1 wizard.

 

[Hussar]

Heh. That's always a problem - nailing down what "low magic" actually means.

Honestly, while I'm not a Pathfinder player, I find Paizo's approach to setting evolution to be absolutely the gold standard. Each region gets an adventure path and then a MOUNTAIN of information about that region. It's a fantastic way to build the world.

 

[Corinnguard]

Heh. That's always a problem - nailing down what "low magic" actually means.

Honestly, while I'm not a Pathfinder player, I find Paizo's approach to setting evolution to be absolutely the gold standard. Each region gets an adventure path and then a MOUNTAIN of information about that region. It's a fantastic way to build the world.

In addition to every region of Golarion getting a supplement which contained the lore of that region, Paizo had its' Races of Golarion and Inner Sea Races books to do the very same thing for its' PC races. My favorite race books in Pathfinder 1st edition were the Blood of Angels and the Blood of Fiends, which covered the Aasimar and Tieflings that lived on Golarion.

5e needs its' own take on 2e's Complete book of (insert species here) or 3e's Races of (Destiny, Stone, Dragon, etc.). Either approach would do nicely.

 

[Hussar]

In addition to every region of Golarion getting a supplement which contained the lore of that region, Paizo had its' Races of Golarion and Inner Sea Races books to do the very same thing for its' PC races. My favorite race books in Pathfinder 1st edition were the Blood of Angels and the Blood of Fiends, which covered the Aasimar and Tieflings that lived on Golarion.

5e needs its' own take on 2e's Complete book of (insert species here) or 3e's Races of (Destiny, Stone, Dragon, etc.). Either approach would do nicely.

Heh. There is such a thing as too much of a good thing. I like the WotC 5e publishing schedule, so, obviously the flood of Golarian material wouldn't fit in that schedule. But a single AP with a setting supplement that covered a small area (for a given definition of small - like I said, I'm perfectly happy with a region that's only about 1000 miles in diameter, and honestly, half that size would be better AFAIC.

I mean, heck, the UK and Ireland are more than enough space for a lot of history. I don't want or need another continent.

 

[Minigiant]

Heh. That's always a problem - nailing down what "low magic" actually means

That's why I don't like using Low Magic

Because there's

High/Low Magic Power
High/Low Magic Frequency
High/Low Magic Versatility
High/Low Magic Visibility

Could be any combination of it

 

[Remathilis]

That idea is silly. The rules are deliberately generic so they can be easily customised, any setting designed around them would be utterly boring. Clearly, in order to make a setting that is remotely interesting it is necessary to modify the core rules. Indeed, that is the intent of the design.

Aka: "the first step to designing an interesting D&D setting is to first remove D&D from it."