D&D 5E restart or rewrite or new?

[Micah Sweet]

But, how do I see things to you then? You want settings as reading material, which means the mechanics don't really matter, that's not why you're buying the books, but, you also want the mechanics updated, without changing the setting despite the fact that the original setting material was based on very different mechanics that don't really work in 5e.

That's a pretty difficult thing to satisfy. I mean, if that's true, then I cannot have a lot of stuff in the earlier settings since it didn't exist in the game at the time - no dwarven magic-users, heck, most races can't be most classes - for example. If we're going by that metric, what's the cutoff? Should Greyhawk only draw on material published before the boxed set? So, no PC drow allowed - since PC drow didn't appear until the Unearthed Arcana 1e? What should Vecna be? A lich? A demi-god? A major deity? Never minding the rather large number of deities that have been added to the setting since the boxed set was released. Should they be excised as well?

Any update to a setting is going to have to make any number of decisions. Where you draw that cut off line is never going to make everyone happy. It's impossible to update a setting to new mechanics without changing the sensibilities of the setting.

And I do have some wiggle room. New options can be added as long as they don't retroactively alter the setting's history in-universe. That's what I care about. The integrity of the story.

 

[Umbran]

I value the settings for the stories they tell in the products as much as for any use on the table. Most of them I primarily experienced as reading material. That's why I don't want them changed.

So, if they don't change them at all, there's nothing actually new for you to read. At that point, you can go reread the old versions, and let others have new ones, no?

New ideas and modern sensibilities should be catered to by new settings.

There is value in the new. There is also value in reworking the old for a new era. I, for one, am glad that there's Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet, as well as two different movies of West Side Story. There's a richness to be found in reinterpretation. And every human legend, fairy tale, fable, and mythology has been told and retold and changed with the times. The one thing our stories aren't is static.

 

[Scribe]

The one thing our stories aren't is static.

Sure, but sometimes Han shot first, and change is not always for the better.

 

[Thunderfoot]

I voted remake with a new take... Only because the setting (Al Quadim) had some very rules centric content that has never been correctly updated, at least IMO. The setting was rich amd ripe with possibility and it just went...nowhere. Of all the settings based on any sort of 'real world' area it seemed to have the best grasp (although it had flaws too). One of the best was its depiction of women through the rules which depicted pre-Islam roles, where women were more than just property. Also it discussed the modesty veils from both sides, all historically accurate. 1001 Arabian Nights is a serious stretch of reading in the unabridged multi-volume editions (The one I read had 24) and was obviously a huge resource. I would live to see it resurrected, but I'm leary as to the treatment it might get.

 

[Older Beholder]

My preference would be for remakes with a new take, or new settings.

The main thing is to have writers and artists that are passionate about the what they're creating.
Making Ravenloft a toolbox of different horror genres for example, was one of the best things they've done in 5E.

I'm really excited to see what they do with Spelljammer.

 

[Minigiant]

I think there is value in all three methods.
However I don't get why the methods were done one at a time.

I mean dragonborn wasputin the 5th edition PHB as a strong, proud, slightly militaristic, and charismatic race. It was published in 2014. It's 2022 now?

Does any published setting have major dragonborn country or empire?

Can my DM buy a book from WOTC that lets my elf wizard experience, take quests from, and gain info from a whole city of breath spewing. element resistant, talkative, scalies with their own cultures and subculutres? Or a nation of tieflings who proclaim only23.775% of them are non-good edgelords? Or a theocracy of druids and rangers will really big (negative) opinions of the Far Realm or whomever they think is a threat to nature?

New takes and old conversions are fine. But we're in Year 8. I don't want D&D to become a nostalgia hobby.

 

[Micah Sweet]

So, if they don't change them at all, there's nothing actually new for you to read. At that point, you can go reread the old versions, and let others have new ones, no?



There is value in the new. There is also value in reworking the old for a new era. I, for one, am glad that there's Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet, as well as two different movies of West Side Story. There's a richness to be found in reinterpretation. And every human legend, fairy tale, fable, and mythology has been told and retold and changed with the times. The one thing our stories aren't is static.

Old things can be added to without changing what's already there. Marvel Comics manages it, more or less. I'm all for that.

And you can tell a similar story with different names, in a different setting, without messing with the original. West Side Story is not Romeo and Juliet 5e.

 

[JEB]

And I do have some wiggle room. New options can be added as long as they don't retroactively alter the setting's history in-universe. That's what I care about. The integrity of the story.

Just to clarify, are you OK with retcons that are explained in canon ("you thought it was X but actually it was Y"), or do your ideal new options have to be purely additive (and previously published canon is set in stone)?

 

[Micah Sweet]

Just to clarify, are you OK with retcons that are explained in canon ("you thought it was X but actually it was Y"), or do your ideal new options have to be purely additive (and previously published canon is set in stone)?

I am ok with those kind of retcons, yes.

 

[Irlo]

I never take a published setting and implement it as written. I always make small or drastic changes to geography, history, religion, etc. to suit my needs in the moment. A published setting is a useful springboard for my imagination -- it's always easier to edit than to create. I don't follow D&D novels or meta-plots, and I always figured the gaming audience was different than the reading audience. Because of that, I don't have any attachment to the stories of the setting, and if those change from one edition or update to the next, it doesn't bother me at all, because I've already diverged. I just can't see changing aspects of an RPG setting as akin to retroactively editing movies. (I'm looking at you, Greedo.)

RPG settings were made to diverge, if only by the events of various campaigns at various tables. And D&D has always encouraged making the game our own.

I never liked Spelljammer, but I was enthralled by the more serious 3e mini-setting based on it that was published in Dungeon Magazine. I picked up one or two Dragonlance modules, but I saw right away they weren't for me, perhaps because I didn't care about the story, and those modules as I remember were definitely all about The Story.

I thought my use of published settings was prevalent, but I'm seeing other perspectives in this thread, so now I wonder if I'm even typical.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Unless of course, you actually want mechanical updates to old settings.

We all want stuff. Doesn't mean we are going to get it. But hey... wish hard enough and maybe we'll luck out.

I for one though don't waste my time hoping for unlikely things... I just choose to either use what's in front of me or not. And if there's something I really find necessary for my game... I'll just make it up on my own instead of fruitlessly waiting. Including updating mechanics for older D&D products.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Sure, but sometimes Han shot first, and change is not always for the better.

this is where I will say I understand that to some that is a bridge too far... however there are alot of bridges to get there.

is luke just a jedi? or is luke a jedi guardian? that change isn't a big deal...

I see alot of people dislikeing warlock or sorcerer in settings made before those classes... even if there were in fluff wizards who made deals with outsiders... like the new class fits the fluff just fine.

(JUST FYI han being missed at point blank is dumb... greddo had a gun on him, he didn't need to fire to be a threat)

 

[Jer]

Sure, but sometimes Han shot first, and change is not always for the better.

But also sometimes the idea that an imp named Mopee threw the lightning bolt that gave the Flash his powers was dumb and it shouldn't have been put to print in the first place. Sometimes change is good, especially if the original material was written for one audience but now it's being explored by a new one. That's why different directors will stage plays in different ways - even Shakespeare's plays aren't set into stone.

Change can be bad, change can be good. IMO the individual changes should be assessed on their own merits.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

But also sometimes the idea that an imp named Mopee threw the lightning bolt that gave the Flash his powers was dumb.

I'm sorry but what!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Flash #167 (1967) attempted to make a dramatic retcon to Barry's speed powers. In the issue, the Flash's body aura wears off during a fight with smugglers. Wondering why his powers are changing, Barry runs into Mopee - a bizarre-looking man who says he's 'initiate tenth class of the heavenly help-mates.' Mopee explains that he was the one of gave Barry his powers. He claims to have deliberately brought the lightning bold down to him, after being assigned by his superiors to grant someone on Earth super-speed. He's later told by those superiors, that Barry's powers are invalid since he didn't own the chemicals that gave him his speed.

why???????????????????

I liked that Barry was the lightning bolt... I didn't mind the speed force (espcially at first with wally and max) but this... I just...

I need to go sit

 

[Jer]

why???????????????????

You write books for kids and you see Batman hanging out with Bat-Mite and Superman getting menaced by Mxyzptlk and you think "I have a deadline - Mopee it is!" It's one of those "everything you ever knew is wrong" reveals that gets rightly ignored by everyone working afterward (like the source of demon/devil teleportation in Planescape, or the true origin of Mind Flayers from the Astromundi Cluster to pull it back to D&D "canon").

I liked that Barry was the lightning bolt... I didn't mind the speed force (espcially at first with wally and max) but this... I just...

I need to go sit

The only thing that surprises me is that Grant Morrison never figured out how to bring back Mopee.

I mean, he brought back Quisp - the imp showed up in Aquaman stories - and even made him a villain. But even for Morrison Mopee seems to have been a bridge too far.

 

[Stormonu]

Old things can be added to without changing what's already there. Marvel Comics manages it, more or less. I'm all for that.

And you can tell a similar story with different names, in a different setting, without messing with the original. West Side Story is not Romeo and Juliet 5e.

I'm not entirely against change either. There's a lot of good things in the new Van Richten's book, but there's some stuff there that I don't agree with. In that regard, I can pull out my old books and use what I prefer. I'll be grumpy about it, but the new book has enough usable mechanics and ideas that it makes the reprint worth it.

What we don't want is the D&D equivalent of the latest Cats movie.

 

[LongTimeLurker]

Wildemount is WOTC buying someone else's campaign to me.

Plus I think Mercer started designing and running Exandria before 5th edition was released.

Shrug. Forgotten Realms was tsr buying someone else's campaign. Eberron is pretty much the same.