D&D (2024) Should There Be a Core Setting?

[Scott Christian]

6e should have a core setting.
That core 6e setting should be designed from scratch.
Official settings and playstyles should be the 6e core setting with modifications and name changes.

This.
All other books could deal with other settings in different planes (places that already exist like Eberron or Dark Sun). This way they can avoid the race debate. They can add a gazillion new classes. They can add science fiction if they want. Whatever. Each half year or quarter, come out with a new place and an adventure that accompanies it. Then also, come out with an adventure and region of the made from scratch setting.

Developing something new will get the writers going. Old timers seeing their past represented will make them happy. And, most importantly for me, a clear demarcation regarding one area's classes and races and sub-rules will exist.

 

[Vaalingrade]

The druid thread is a great case for going setting agnostic. Because the designers made a flavor decision, people treat it like a literal real-world taboo instead of making their own choices. It's like a smaller version of the LG Paladin thing.

 

[R_J_K75]

I find it hard to take 6e seriously when 5e is so absolutely, clearly on the ascension. The profit growth of another year shows almost doubling profits. for what it’s worth though I think Forgotten Realms works as the default setting that keeps on giving. Though I don’t think it really matters where an adventure is set as long as it is set somewhere. I can file the numbers or Greyhawk as easily as I can file them off Forgotten Realms or Golarion.

View attachment 141571
*My first ever meme by the way. Inspired by P Anckorn

I think I almost soiled myself. Keep in mind Im browsing the thread, came upon this and saw it and thought its Right Said Fred" when it actually was I laughed my ass off.

 

[R_J_K75]

I would recommend a different format for 6e rather than DMG, PHB, MM.

Id much prefer a single or duo PHB/DMG/MM format of the core books.

 

[Northern Phoenix]

Yes. To me, the game is about playing as fantasy archetype characters in variety of fantasy story archetypes. To this end, it is helpful to have a solid set of core assumptions that exist beyond "it can be anything at all, maaan". The books say "make it your own" every 10 pages at least, which i don't mind, but i am of the opinion that it is much better to have a solid core you can deviate from, than a bare mold where you have to do everything yourself.

 

[TheSword]

I think I almost soiled myself. Keep in mind Im browsing the thread, came upon this and saw it and thought its Right Said Fred" when it actually was I laughed my ass off.

I’m posting that in every 6e thread I see until the mods tell me to stop!

 

[R_J_K75]

I’m posting that in every 6e thread I see until the mods tell me to stop!

I pissed myself,...literally!

 

[Remathilis]

This is a simple question and hopefully a larger discussion about direction that the 3 core rulebooks in 6e could take; Should there be a Core Setting in 6e? That is, should the 3 core rulebooks and the rest of the base edition assume that a certain setting is being used in the flavor-text for the PHB race, the Monsters in the Monster Manual, and the descriptions of the world(s) in the DMG (though, the 5e DMG has much less setting-assumption than the PHB and DMG)? Should there be named spells like "Mordenkainen's Magnificent Mansion" and "Bigby's Hand" in favor of "Magnificent Mansion" and "Arcanist's Hand"?

What are your thoughts on this?

Yes. D&D is the only non-generic RPG I know of that doesn't have an implicit setting. Pathfinder has Golarion, D&D should have a similar. Be it Realms, Nentir Vale or Greyhawk, they're should be a default in the core.

It's Dungeons & Dragons, not Generic Fantasy Simulator d20.

 

[Urriak Uruk]

So before I give my own opinion on 6E, I have to ask... does 5E even have a Core Setting?

My gut instinct would say "Yes, and it's Forgotten Realms." But it's not really. It gets mentioned a lot in the core rulebooks, and its definitely the default in 90% of released adventure books, but it's not really the Core Setting. Yes the core rulebooks all work perfectly with FR... but they work just as well with Greyhawk, Exandria, or the majority of homebrew games. I don't even think the core books are better suited for FR than those other settings.

So anyway, I guess I'm voting for "no, but some setting assumptions/descriptions are ok."

 

[Northern Phoenix]

So before I give my own opinion on 6E, I have to ask... does 5E even have a Core Setting?

My gut instinct would say "Yes, and it's Forgotten Realms." But it's not really. It gets mentioned a lot in the core rulebooks, and its definitely the default in 90% of released adventure books, but it's not really the Core Setting. Yes the core rulebooks all work perfectly with FR... but they work just as well with Greyhawk, Exandria, or the majority of homebrew games. I don't even think the core books are better suited for FR than those other settings.

So anyway, I guess I'm voting for "no, but some setting assumptions/descriptions are ok."

That's the point of the core setting though. It's supposed to be solid enough to inspire you and guide you without ever completely restricting you.