D&D 5E Ray Winninger mentions third project!

WotC's Ray Winninger has confirmed that another D&D release, by James Wyatt, will be released in between Witchlight (September) and Strixhaven (November). Strixhaven was Amanda Hamon's project, while Witchlight is Chris Perkins'. That assumes he's not referring to the Feywild accessory kit in September.

A lot of people are asking Qs about the [D&D] releases for the rest of this year.

Yes, WILD BEYOND THE WITCHLIGHT is the [Chris Perkins] story product I referenced in our dev blog. STRIXHAVEN is [Amanda Hamon's] project. We have not yet announced [James Wyatt's] project, which releases between WITCHLIGHT and STRIXHAVEN.

Why did we announce STRIXHAVEN so early? Pretty simple--there was no way to release the STRIX-related Unearthed Arcana without letting the cat out of the bag.

You'll learn a lot more about all of these products at D&D Live on G4, July 16 and 17. And yes, there is still a little surprise or two ahead.



 
Last edited by a moderator:

log in or register to remove this ad

jerryrice4949

Adventurer
I'm pretty sure WotC has plenty of intel on the popularity of Dragonlance, which is why they have shown no interest on jumping on that particular bandwagon.

40% of D&D players are 25 or younger. They weren't born when Dragonlance was popular.
I am pretty sure you are wrong. Where did this magic data come from? A one time survey on WoTCs site. How many people completed it? I am not saying they will do a Dragonlance setting. Probably not but I think the idea that there is a ton of data indicating Dragonlance would be a bomb is a lame narrative.

40% of D&D players are 25 or younger and were not around when Ravenloft was popular. Yet it appears to be doing well.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Parmandur

Book-Friend
I am pretty sure you are wrong. Where did this magic data come from? A one time survey on WoTCs site. How many people completed it? I am not saying they will do a Dragonlance setting. Probably not but I think the idea that there is a ton of data indicating Dragonlance would be a bomb is a lame narrative.

40% of D&D players are 25 or younger and were not around when Ravenloft was popular. Yet it appears to be doing well.
That particular survey was somewhere North of a million respondents, IIRC.
 
Last edited:

jerryrice4949

Adventurer
That particular survey was somewhere Borth of a million respondents, IIRC.
Last time, we asked you to tell us which classic D&D settings, character concepts, and character races you want to see updated. Not surprisingly, it turns out that a lot of people cared about these topics, and we had one of our biggest turnouts ever for a survey. So what did we learn?

The popularity of settings in the survey fell into three distinct clusters. Not surprisingly, our most popular settings from prior editions landed at the top of the rankings, with Eberron, Ravenloft, Dark Sun, Planescape, and the Forgotten Realms all proving equally popular. Greyhawk, Dragonlance, and Spelljammer all shared a similar level of second-tier popularity, followed by a fairly steep drop-off to the rest of the settings. My sense is that Spelljammer has often lagged behind the broad popularity of other settings, falling into love-it-or-hate-it status depending on personal tastes. Greyhawk and Dragonlance hew fairly close to the assumptions we used in creating the fifth edition rulebooks, making them much easier to run with material from past editions. Of the top five settings, four require significant new material to function and the fifth is by far our most popular world.

(A few people asked about Al-Qadim in the comments field, since it wasn’t included in the survey. The reason for that is because we think of that setting as part of the Forgotten Realms. Why did Kara-Tur end up on the list, then? Because I make mistakes!)

Before addressing the character types question, it’s important to focus on how we look at this question. The word “type,” as opposed to “class,” is a key part of the query. The concepts embodied by a warden or runepriest could be character classes, or they could be subtypes within a class. For any character type, we’ll try out a few design approaches and see which one works best.

The artificer, the shaman, and the alchemist finished well in front in the survey. The alchemist is particularly interesting because we’ve never presented that as a class in a Player’s Handbookbefore. The crazy game designer in me thinks that all three of those character types could be represented in a single class (imagine a shaman who binds spirits by creating talismans). But that might just be all the caffeine I’ve consumed today talking.

Most of the remaining options formed a cluster about 10 to 15 points below those leading three. My sense is that the samurai is a pretty good example of how we’ll handle those types, making them most likely to show up as options for existing classes. For instance, a samurai could fall under a fighter archetype that I would tentatively call the devoted defender—a character whose obedience to a code of conduct and unbreakable loyalty makes her an implacable force in battle.

Races fell into three tiers of popularity, with the thri-kreen, the goblin, and the aasimar at the top—an interesting mix. In my own campaigns, I’ve seen people play goblins for comedic value. Thri-kreen are pretty tough to model using our existing races, but are key to the Dark Sun setting. Aasimar would be a lot of fun to work on. Personally, I’d want them to be as interesting and compelling as tieflings. My personal bias might be showing (since aasimars are my favorite race), but it’s easy to make good guys kind of boring and lame. I’d love to recast the aasimar a little bit, giving the race a few unique traits and a visual appearance attuned to a holy avenger out to kick ass.

The next most popular tier of races includes catfolk, devas, githyanki, githzerai, gnolls, half-giants, hobgoblins, kender, kobolds, lizardfolk, pixies, and revenants. Personally, I’d love to pick up Mystara’s rakasta as our catfolk race, but all these options have strong legacies to build on. The less-popular races are by no means off the table, but they’re likely at the back of the R&D queue—and might run the risk of other races beyond those addressed in this survey cutting in line ahead of them.’

When I read this I clearly get the impression that Dragonlance material for 5E is a stretch since in their opinion it is easy to port over from other additions. But I see no actual statistical breakdown and no mention of total survey responses.
 

Kurotowa

Legend
40% of D&D players are 25 or younger and were not around when Ravenloft was popular. Yet it appears to be doing well.
It's doing well because VRG doesn't wallow in nostalgia, but stole the best ideas from old Ravenloft while cutting and remixing and expanding the setting to update it for the current day. To the loud complaints of many people on this forum, mind you. But if WotC did a Dragonlance setting book it would have to be exactly the same thing. Not a nostalgic revival but a reinvention that carries over all the good ideas while remaking it into something modern.

But let's be honest... what are the good ideas in Dragonlance? Most of the lingering attachment seems to be over the novels and their characters, not the ideas of the setting. The setting is a rotten mess, from the horrible races to the unusual moral cosmology. They'd be throwing out more than they're keeping, and at that point why even call it Dragonlance?
 


An update of the Dragonlance setting will need to be cleaned up and brought up to modern standards, the same way they did with Ravenloft. I am wondering how the new novels are going to handle that, because people new to Dragonlance will read them and go looking at the old books and be shocked/horrified/disappointed/whatever at the differences. Unless Hickman and Weiss are trying to write them with the same insensitivities that the original novels have.
 


jerryrice4949

Adventurer
It's doing well because VRG doesn't wallow in nostalgia, but stole the best ideas from old Ravenloft while cutting and remixing and expanding the setting to update it for the current day. To the loud complaints of many people on this forum, mind you. But if WotC did a Dragonlance setting book it would have to be exactly the same thing. Not a nostalgic revival but a reinvention that carries over all the good ideas while remaking it into something modern.

But let's be honest... what are the good ideas in Dragonlance? Most of the lingering attachment seems to be over the novels and their characters, not the ideas of the setting. The setting is a rotten mess, from the horrible races to the unusual moral cosmology. They'd be throwing out more than they're keeping, and at that point why even call it Dragonlance?
We will just have to disagree. There were many elements of Krynn that were either underdeveloped or poorly developed. But I love the way 2nd edition handled both the Solamnic Knights and the Wizards of High Sorcery. Both felt very distinct from other classes/sub classes in 2nd edition.
 

Parmandur

Book-Friend
Last time, we asked you to tell us which classic D&D settings, character concepts, and character races you want to see updated. Not surprisingly, it turns out that a lot of people cared about these topics, and we had one of our biggest turnouts ever for a survey. So what did we learn?

The popularity of settings in the survey fell into three distinct clusters. Not surprisingly, our most popular settings from prior editions landed at the top of the rankings, with Eberron, Ravenloft, Dark Sun, Planescape, and the Forgotten Realms all proving equally popular. Greyhawk, Dragonlance, and Spelljammer all shared a similar level of second-tier popularity, followed by a fairly steep drop-off to the rest of the settings. My sense is that Spelljammer has often lagged behind the broad popularity of other settings, falling into love-it-or-hate-it status depending on personal tastes. Greyhawk and Dragonlance hew fairly close to the assumptions we used in creating the fifth edition rulebooks, making them much easier to run with material from past editions. Of the top five settings, four require significant new material to function and the fifth is by far our most popular world.

(A few people asked about Al-Qadim in the comments field, since it wasn’t included in the survey. The reason for that is because we think of that setting as part of the Forgotten Realms. Why did Kara-Tur end up on the list, then? Because I make mistakes!)

Before addressing the character types question, it’s important to focus on how we look at this question. The word “type,” as opposed to “class,” is a key part of the query. The concepts embodied by a warden or runepriest could be character classes, or they could be subtypes within a class. For any character type, we’ll try out a few design approaches and see which one works best.

The artificer, the shaman, and the alchemist finished well in front in the survey. The alchemist is particularly interesting because we’ve never presented that as a class in a Player’s Handbookbefore. The crazy game designer in me thinks that all three of those character types could be represented in a single class (imagine a shaman who binds spirits by creating talismans). But that might just be all the caffeine I’ve consumed today talking.

Most of the remaining options formed a cluster about 10 to 15 points below those leading three. My sense is that the samurai is a pretty good example of how we’ll handle those types, making them most likely to show up as options for existing classes. For instance, a samurai could fall under a fighter archetype that I would tentatively call the devoted defender—a character whose obedience to a code of conduct and unbreakable loyalty makes her an implacable force in battle.

Races fell into three tiers of popularity, with the thri-kreen, the goblin, and the aasimar at the top—an interesting mix. In my own campaigns, I’ve seen people play goblins for comedic value. Thri-kreen are pretty tough to model using our existing races, but are key to the Dark Sun setting. Aasimar would be a lot of fun to work on. Personally, I’d want them to be as interesting and compelling as tieflings. My personal bias might be showing (since aasimars are my favorite race), but it’s easy to make good guys kind of boring and lame. I’d love to recast the aasimar a little bit, giving the race a few unique traits and a visual appearance attuned to a holy avenger out to kick ass.

The next most popular tier of races includes catfolk, devas, githyanki, githzerai, gnolls, half-giants, hobgoblins, kender, kobolds, lizardfolk, pixies, and revenants. Personally, I’d love to pick up Mystara’s rakasta as our catfolk race, but all these options have strong legacies to build on. The less-popular races are by no means off the table, but they’re likely at the back of the R&D queue—and might run the risk of other races beyond those addressed in this survey cutting in line ahead of them.’

When I read this I clearly get the impression that Dragonlance material for 5E is a stretch since in their opinion it is easy to port over from other additions. But I see no actual statistical breakdown and no mention of total survey responses.
Mearls discussed that aort of thing on Twittee. The Obama era was a simpler time.
 

Parmandur

Book-Friend
And we may have our best guess with that survey response. If you go by the ranking presented. We’ll get Darksun and Planescape. Which I’d be super happy with.
My takeaway is that if the Settings continue to do well, it's not going to be too many years until we actually see Greyhawk and Spelljammer. They've kept some of the third tier Settinfs in the conversation of customer surveys, too, so they are not hopeless in the longterm.

I forgot that Thri-Kreen were a top level PC Race request, since.nothing has come of that yet. My guy says that Dark Sun is a very solid bet for this new batch.
 

Parmandur

Book-Friend
Last time, we asked you to tell us which classic D&D settings, character concepts, and character races you want to see updated. Not surprisingly, it turns out that a lot of people cared about these topics, and we had one of our biggest turnouts ever for a survey. So what did we learn?

The popularity of settings in the survey fell into three distinct clusters. Not surprisingly, our most popular settings from prior editions landed at the top of the rankings, with Eberron, Ravenloft, Dark Sun, Planescape, and the Forgotten Realms all proving equally popular. Greyhawk, Dragonlance, and Spelljammer all shared a similar level of second-tier popularity, followed by a fairly steep drop-off to the rest of the settings. My sense is that Spelljammer has often lagged behind the broad popularity of other settings, falling into love-it-or-hate-it status depending on personal tastes. Greyhawk and Dragonlance hew fairly close to the assumptions we used in creating the fifth edition rulebooks, making them much easier to run with material from past editions. Of the top five settings, four require significant new material to function and the fifth is by far our most popular world.

(A few people asked about Al-Qadim in the comments field, since it wasn’t included in the survey. The reason for that is because we think of that setting as part of the Forgotten Realms. Why did Kara-Tur end up on the list, then? Because I make mistakes!)

Before addressing the character types question, it’s important to focus on how we look at this question. The word “type,” as opposed to “class,” is a key part of the query. The concepts embodied by a warden or runepriest could be character classes, or they could be subtypes within a class. For any character type, we’ll try out a few design approaches and see which one works best.

The artificer, the shaman, and the alchemist finished well in front in the survey. The alchemist is particularly interesting because we’ve never presented that as a class in a Player’s Handbookbefore. The crazy game designer in me thinks that all three of those character types could be represented in a single class (imagine a shaman who binds spirits by creating talismans). But that might just be all the caffeine I’ve consumed today talking.

Most of the remaining options formed a cluster about 10 to 15 points below those leading three. My sense is that the samurai is a pretty good example of how we’ll handle those types, making them most likely to show up as options for existing classes. For instance, a samurai could fall under a fighter archetype that I would tentatively call the devoted defender—a character whose obedience to a code of conduct and unbreakable loyalty makes her an implacable force in battle.

Races fell into three tiers of popularity, with the thri-kreen, the goblin, and the aasimar at the top—an interesting mix. In my own campaigns, I’ve seen people play goblins for comedic value. Thri-kreen are pretty tough to model using our existing races, but are key to the Dark Sun setting. Aasimar would be a lot of fun to work on. Personally, I’d want them to be as interesting and compelling as tieflings. My personal bias might be showing (since aasimars are my favorite race), but it’s easy to make good guys kind of boring and lame. I’d love to recast the aasimar a little bit, giving the race a few unique traits and a visual appearance attuned to a holy avenger out to kick ass.

The next most popular tier of races includes catfolk, devas, githyanki, githzerai, gnolls, half-giants, hobgoblins, kender, kobolds, lizardfolk, pixies, and revenants. Personally, I’d love to pick up Mystara’s rakasta as our catfolk race, but all these options have strong legacies to build on. The less-popular races are by no means off the table, but they’re likely at the back of the R&D queue—and might run the risk of other races beyond those addressed in this survey cutting in line ahead of them.’

When I read this I clearly get the impression that Dragonlance material for 5E is a stretch since in their opinion it is easy to port over from other additions. But I see no actual statistical breakdown and no mention of total survey responses.
Though I definitely take your point that we don't have raw data to analyze here: but for predictive power of WotC behavior over the past few years this has a pretty good track record.
 

Sithlord

Adventurer
I would love to see the towers of high sorcerery developed and a good mechanic for them drawing powers from the moon. I would also like to see a good development for solamnic knights where they have to meet specific requirements to progress through the orders similar to prestige classes (I doubt that will happen). I really liked the 2E solamnic knight. High ogres would be something else very cool.
 



dave2008

Legend
Maybe, but historically they weren't, and as someone who spent a lot of time in the Dragonlance fan community I can tell you there was a significant amount of novel fans who bought the RPG material.
I bought both back in the day too, but I didn't treat them as the same thing. However, I really didn't get deep into DL, and I am not a hardcore fan. I just generally think people are mature enough treat them as separate things. I realize some can't but think in this day and age most can.
 

Though I definitely take your point that we don't have raw data to analyze here: but for predictive power of WotC behavior over the past few years this has a pretty good track record.

It used to be you could predict future actions some what based on previous years of 5e at WotC, but things are changing massively this year in all kinds of ways.

It used to be you could predict roughly how many books WotC would release because Boss Nathan Stewart didn't want to bloat things and burn folks out. New Boss Ray Winninger sees things differently and is uping the releases to 5 major releases this year, who knows how many next year. Used to be more then one product per quarter was rare, now we are getting 3 major releases 3 months in a row. If back to back to back releases this year can happen, whose to say 5 or 6 books next year is the max if they no longer feel the need to stagger them. Things are changing fast.

MtG side visiting 4 different planes in none core premiere sets in a singlwould have been unthinkable, usually it'd be 1 or 2, on rare occasion 3, this year they are visiting Kaldheim, Archivios, FR, and Innistrad, with an unpresented 5 Premiere sets in one year. When AFR comes out 7 planes will be in Standard at once (Eldraine, Theros, Ikoria, Zendikar, Kaldheim, Arcivios, Forgotten Realms), unpresidented. Universes Beyond next year will be an even bigger change.

So anything and everything is possible now, no matter what presidence has been, its a time of chaos and change for everything.

To paraphrase General Chang "Cry Havok, and let slip the dogs of D&D..."
 

The owlfolk seem to be the only one of the four that would apply to the Strixhaven world, though, no? Fairy and fey hobgoblins definitely seem more likely for a Feywild product. Rabbitfolk? That also sounds very apropos with respect to the Feywild, no?
The fairy is a pretty strange fit for traditional D&D fairy folk. I wouldn't be shocked if it and the hobgoblin were actually meant to be some other races. I don't play MTG (it took me a second to decipher what "AFR" was), but maybe there are some other MTG races whom the mechanics would make sense for, with other fluff.
 

Planescape is powered by alignments out of favor with modern Players.
Alignment is almost entirely something that matters to planar creatures in 5E.

They can publish Planescape under 5E and be fine.

I would bet on a Van Richten's approach, though, with a single planar sourcebook that mentions Sigil, the City of Brass, etc., and has short treatments of the various planes, but nothing comparable to any given Planescape boxed set.

The biggest question would be how big the treatment would be for Sigil and what, if anything, they do with the state of affairs for the factions. I can easily see them mentioning that the factions exist, but not naming them, and leaving it at that, so that groups that want to roll back the end of the Faction War can do so and the ones who want to follow the storyline out further can as well. (I mean, every group can do whatever they want, but obviously, there's a big group that likes their take on things to be canonized.)
 


Parmandur

Book-Friend
The fairy is a pretty strange fit for traditional D&D fairy folk. I wouldn't be shocked if it and the hobgoblin were actually meant to be some other races. I don't play MTG (it took me a second to decipher what "AFR" was), but maybe there are some other MTG races whom the mechanics would make sense for, with other fluff.
Well, Fairies are a specific Race in MtG stuff, not a broad category as in D&D, and...they look a lot like what was in the UA article (often larger than Tiny, variable size because magic, specifically). The odd part is that there are no Fairies or Goblins at Strixhaben in the cards, so any which way something funny is going on.
 

Visit Our Sponsor

Latest threads

Level Up!

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top