D&D 5E Revisiting future product predictions (2021 and beyond)


log in or register to remove this ad

whimsychris123

Adventurer
My predictions:

Settings: We'll get two of them, Planescape and Ravenloft.
Hardcover: Famous Dragon's Book of Stuff (focused on all things draconic)
Adventure: A Far Realms-inspired adventure in the Forgotten Realms
 

BenTheFerg

Explorer
My predictions:

Settings: We'll get two of them, Planescape and Ravenloft.
Hardcover: Famous Dragon's Book of Stuff (focused on all things draconic)
Adventure: A Far Realms-inspired adventure in the Forgotten Realms
Seems we will be getting a Spelljammer book - setting I assume.

Will they try and tie Planescape into that? Seems with the discussion on alignment and shift from races to ancestries, that this makes Planescape even harder to redo. But Spelljammer straight forward.

I hope you are right Mercurious. Planescape/ Manual of the Planes with a MM at the back plus a mega module spanning the planes. Would be happier with a series of adventures which can be linked but which are free standing. Fed up of meta plot adventures which players have no agency in. Crowbarring agency into them can be time consuming!

Dragonlance..... I dont like it but now the court case is over..... what does this mean? Time will tell i guess. It's a cash cow.

I hear lots of talk about WotC being sold off.... so I imagine this may derail projects/ fast forward 6th edition if it is sold and the new buyer wants an immediate return on their investment. Maybe 5.5, incorporating all the recent changes in a more thorough fashion. Tasha's on racial mods was paper thin and underdeveloped.

Happy Christmas all from Boris' Bonkers Brexit Britain.
 

WotC will be not be sold. When has Hasbro done anything like this? Other thing is a merger or acquisition by a bigger fish.

I am afraid the return of Planescape will be throught a back door, a planar guide and some modules.

Dragonlance? Not setting yet, but the updated compilation of modules.

Spelljammer is very possible, but it needs special game mechanics to pilot the space-ships.
 

Will they try and tie Planescape into that? Seems with the discussion on alignment and shift from races to ancestries, that this makes Planescape even harder to redo. But Spelljammer straight forward.
TL:DR changes to focus on alignment won't make Planescape a difficult setting to redo.

I don't think any of the changes to alignment, whether it be the one about alignment being strictly a Role-Playing Guideline, or separating alignment from PC races automatically excludes Planescape. Alignments were quite tied to Immortal/Alignment-Paragon creatures like Fiends and Celestials, which were never PC races in the standard Planescape material. I definitely got the impression that the new outlook on alignment doesn't apply to those creatures. And even with those races there were the rare fallen celestial and risen fiend.

It may have had various 2e'isms (Level Limits! THAC0! Racial Class Restrictions!) about certainly PC races like Githzerai (CN) and Githyanki (LE, and in a product outside the core setting boxed set), both those were outright ignored in most cases, even though their entries allowed for some flexibility beyond the given alignment. Tiefling which Planescape first introduced, were never tied to an evil alignment, they might have had the Not-LG restriction in one of their writeups, but it might have been just some excuse to exclude them from being Paladins in the 2e rules (unlike many 2e races they could be almost every class in 2e). Tieflings might canonically be the first PC race that had NPCs of non-binary genders, as far back as the 90s. Bariuar had some pronounced gender differences between male (horn attacks) and female (skill and save bonuses), as Goat-Centaurs they're sort of the third wheel race of the setting and ret-conning Bariaur to all have the same abilities regardless of gender won't kill Planescape as a setting.

Alignments were quite strongly tied to factions, but factions were tied to philosophies like Solipsism, Theism, Objectivism, Nihilism, Authoritarianism, Anarchism, Fatalism and so on. One certainly could map certain alignments to some philosophies, as some factions are alignment restricted and others were permissive to all alignments.

As a setting Planescape leaned heavily towards Roleplaying instead of mechanics, despite the main designer having worked on a system like Rolemaster. When it got rules-heavy it was a lot of RAW things like "doing this thing in that plane": your +2 sword from the prime material plane is non-magical on the outer planes, because it lost one + from the astral, and another plus crossing into the outer planes or the Dimension Door spell doesn't work period in Sigil because that spell crosses into the Ethereal Plane and Sigil is cutoff from the Ethereal Plane, and other convoluted rules. I'm definitely of the opinion that you could and should throw out all of those rules, and Planescape would still be Planescape without them.
 

Charlaquin

Goblin Queen (She/Her/Hers)
If there's a Magic the Gathering setting it's usually the based on the set that's out at the same time as when the book will be released. So I'm guessing it would be Zendikar.
Zendikar Rising is already the lame duck though, as spoiler season for Kaldheim has started. Then we’ll get Strixhaven, followed by Forgotten Realms. If ever there was a year for no M:tG crossover set, it’d be 21.
 



One of the things that might hint at future products is the art in Tasha's Cauldron. There's a picture of Azalin which might suggest Ravenloft, and a picture of Rhys which might suggest Planescape.
 

We can't forget the psionic powers and Dark Sun.

More modules linked with Ravenloft are possible, one of them would be the house of the gryphon hill and Bleak House: the death of Rudolph van Ritchen.

I have said some times Ravenloft would be the easiest option of a D&D line to be adapted into an action-live teleserie for Entertaiment-One.
 

Remove ads

Top