Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Ravnica: Is This The New D&D Setting? [UPDATED & CONFIRMED!]
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Mercule" data-source="post: 7754056" data-attributes="member: 5100"><p>As I've been reading this thread, this is the thought that started creeping in, and I'm not happy about it.</p><p></p><p>I don't really care if they produce a cross-over setting. Actually, I'm probably more positive on the idea, even if I really have no interest in any sort of "everything is a city" setting or MtG crossover, personally. I've always said that I really just don't want to see D&D devolve into being married to a single setting -- especially the Realms.</p><p></p><p>About the only legacy setting that I, personally, have strong feelings about getting 5E support is Eberron. I'm an avid home-brewer and have looted pretty much every other setting for spare parts, but Eberron is the only one that I've actively used, as a GM (I don't really count the handful of times I've set one-shots in Greyhawk as a sort of "neutral ground" as the same thing). I think some of the other settings (Dark Sun and Ravenloft, especially) have sufficient uniqueness to them that fans would feel similarly and there might be enough of a market to support something. I'd welcome a "grand tour of the worlds" where every year, a single setting was given a flavorful adventure (ala <u>Curse of Strahd</u>).</p><p></p><p>As far as the topic at hand goes, I'm trying to take an unfortunate leak as just that -- something without context. The existence of a MtG crossover doesn't mean there isn't something else, as well. The quotes from Nathan seem to indicate that we'll get three settings, in some form. At least one of those will "really make hardcore fans happy" (or something akin to that). If that's not some form of physical product, Nathan has no clue about what will make hardcore fans happy.</p><p></p><p>And this, maybe more than anything, is the real problem with the way 5E is being handled, right now. Maybe it's Nathan's style. Maybe it's Nathan doing his best to polish a turd being handed to him. There are a lot of things that can be done with D&D, at this moment. WotC could marry it to the Realms as the only supported setting because that's where the money is. They could opt to give basic, but formal support to older settings, whether the CoS one-and-done adventure, a SCAG one-and-done book, or even a "worlds of adventure" collection of strictly minimalist coverage. They could leverage other, known, IPs as with the Ravnica book. They could create something totally new. They could take a couple of "easy wins", too, and just open up settings on DMs Guild without any physical support. They could do some combination of the above.</p><p></p><p>What they <u>shouldn't</u> do, though, is be misleading and/or botch the hype machine. A huge, month-long plus build-up about how you're going to make "hardcore fans" happy that ends with an announcement about "Yeah, Eberron material can be released on the DMs Guild, but we aren't doing anything, ourselves," isn't appropriate. While it might "satisfy" hardcore fans, it isn't going to "excite", "please", or "make happy" any hardcore fans. This is especially true when they're (probably) announcing a hardcover for a crossover setting on the same day they're (potentially) announcing the lack of one for hardcore fans.</p><p></p><p>Again, it's not that any of the potential choices WotC is making about what products to make are strictly <u>wrong</u>. It's that they don't seem to jive with the hype. The problem with a leak is that we really don't know how this will play out, yet. I'm pointing out the potential issues and why folks might getting grumpy, but I'm doing a pretty good job of <u>internally</u> being comfortable with waiting for the official announcement before I grab a pitchfork.</p><p></p><p>Note that Eberron has one potential ace in the hole with a "DMs Guild support, but no hardcover" that no other setting enjoys: Keith Baker. If the announcement includes a statement that Keith is committed to producing an official 5E conversion and X additional "books" over the next year, then hardcore fans of the setting will likely actually be happy enough about that that the disappointment over the hardcover will be offset enough for the hype to make sense. As a semi-hardcore fan, I'd still love to see a hardcover of some sort. Really, though, my main beef with the current model is that, based on the current product line-up, the Realms appear to new players as the only setting for D&D, so I'll get over it.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Mercule, post: 7754056, member: 5100"] As I've been reading this thread, this is the thought that started creeping in, and I'm not happy about it. I don't really care if they produce a cross-over setting. Actually, I'm probably more positive on the idea, even if I really have no interest in any sort of "everything is a city" setting or MtG crossover, personally. I've always said that I really just don't want to see D&D devolve into being married to a single setting -- especially the Realms. About the only legacy setting that I, personally, have strong feelings about getting 5E support is Eberron. I'm an avid home-brewer and have looted pretty much every other setting for spare parts, but Eberron is the only one that I've actively used, as a GM (I don't really count the handful of times I've set one-shots in Greyhawk as a sort of "neutral ground" as the same thing). I think some of the other settings (Dark Sun and Ravenloft, especially) have sufficient uniqueness to them that fans would feel similarly and there might be enough of a market to support something. I'd welcome a "grand tour of the worlds" where every year, a single setting was given a flavorful adventure (ala [U]Curse of Strahd[/U]). As far as the topic at hand goes, I'm trying to take an unfortunate leak as just that -- something without context. The existence of a MtG crossover doesn't mean there isn't something else, as well. The quotes from Nathan seem to indicate that we'll get three settings, in some form. At least one of those will "really make hardcore fans happy" (or something akin to that). If that's not some form of physical product, Nathan has no clue about what will make hardcore fans happy. And this, maybe more than anything, is the real problem with the way 5E is being handled, right now. Maybe it's Nathan's style. Maybe it's Nathan doing his best to polish a turd being handed to him. There are a lot of things that can be done with D&D, at this moment. WotC could marry it to the Realms as the only supported setting because that's where the money is. They could opt to give basic, but formal support to older settings, whether the CoS one-and-done adventure, a SCAG one-and-done book, or even a "worlds of adventure" collection of strictly minimalist coverage. They could leverage other, known, IPs as with the Ravnica book. They could create something totally new. They could take a couple of "easy wins", too, and just open up settings on DMs Guild without any physical support. They could do some combination of the above. What they [U]shouldn't[/U] do, though, is be misleading and/or botch the hype machine. A huge, month-long plus build-up about how you're going to make "hardcore fans" happy that ends with an announcement about "Yeah, Eberron material can be released on the DMs Guild, but we aren't doing anything, ourselves," isn't appropriate. While it might "satisfy" hardcore fans, it isn't going to "excite", "please", or "make happy" any hardcore fans. This is especially true when they're (probably) announcing a hardcover for a crossover setting on the same day they're (potentially) announcing the lack of one for hardcore fans. Again, it's not that any of the potential choices WotC is making about what products to make are strictly [U]wrong[/U]. It's that they don't seem to jive with the hype. The problem with a leak is that we really don't know how this will play out, yet. I'm pointing out the potential issues and why folks might getting grumpy, but I'm doing a pretty good job of [U]internally[/U] being comfortable with waiting for the official announcement before I grab a pitchfork. Note that Eberron has one potential ace in the hole with a "DMs Guild support, but no hardcover" that no other setting enjoys: Keith Baker. If the announcement includes a statement that Keith is committed to producing an official 5E conversion and X additional "books" over the next year, then hardcore fans of the setting will likely actually be happy enough about that that the disappointment over the hardcover will be offset enough for the hype to make sense. As a semi-hardcore fan, I'd still love to see a hardcover of some sort. Really, though, my main beef with the current model is that, based on the current product line-up, the Realms appear to new players as the only setting for D&D, so I'll get over it. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Ravnica: Is This The New D&D Setting? [UPDATED & CONFIRMED!]
Top