D&D 5E So, Forgotten Realms...

[Evenglare]

Not sure where people are getting that FR is the default setting for 5e? Link? All I have seen was that 5e would incorporate all settings / be setting agnostic. So again, can anyone give me the link that 5e is FR centric? Thanks!

 

[Hand of Evil]

While I would have preferred that WotC come out with something new to begin, I understand why they're starting with the FR. Plus it isn't like they're going to stop there. As others have said, the core rulebooks are "pan-setting."



Out of curiosity, what do you mean by "old and dated" and needing to be updated? Are you talking about design techniques as laid out in the Kobold Guide (which I own and have read much of)? Or are you talking more about the fact that the Realms have the patina of the decades they were designed in (70s-80s)?

Both, it is 20+ years in age and should be looked at, the design concepts in KGtWB would be helpful. Plus, 20+ years, gamers, their needs and wants have changed. WotC marketing plan in the past and does not seem to be changing is to just keeps rehashing the old material, not providing something new.

 

[was]

It doesn't really matter what the core setting is, you can just apply the basics to your regular campaign.
Plus they'll probably produce multiple campaign setting materials for others within the first two years.

 

[Alarian]

Out of curiosity, what do you mean by "old and dated" and needing to be updated? Are you talking about design techniques as laid out in the Kobold Guide (which I own and have read much of)? Or are you talking more about the fact that the Realms have the patina of the decades they were designed in (70s-80s)?

For me old and dated means, it's been pretty much the default setting since the 1980's. Many people have been there and down that countless times. Sure they move the timeline around a bit, mess the pot a bit and such, but it's still the same setting. It's like growing up next to Disney Land and going 5-10 times a year for your entire childhood. You finally turn 18 and move half way across the country. Then, every time your friends want to take a vacation they say "lets go to Disney Land!" You're thinking Ugg. I've been there 100 times already, lets go somewhere else" but nope, Disney Land it is, over and over and over. It's an awesome place, but it gets old going back to the same place time after time. No matter where you go you know where everything is, and have seen everything before. Sure they may put a new paint job on something but it's still the same thing.

In the end, I'm certainly not upset, just disappointed. There are enough other campaign worlds out there that it won't effect my gaming, I just would have like to have seen some new, fresh stuff that was created specifically for 5th.

 

[Echohawk]

I just would have like to have seen some new, fresh stuff that was created specifically for 5th.

Me too, but I think the 5e design team made the right decision to go with FR. This is an edition specifically designed after a long, hard look back at the rich history of D&D. One of its goals is to bring together players of all editions. In that light, it makes a lot of sense to have the initial releases focus on an existing setting, and not create something new.

I'd very much like to see a new D&D setting created specifically with the 5e rule-set in mind, but I'm content to wait a few years for that. I'm fine if WotC first revisits a few more classic settings. From an innovation point of view, I'd also rather WotC have a couple of year's more experience with the 5e system before designing a new setting; I think Eberron befitted from being a 3.5e line instead of a 3.0 line.

PS: Did anyone else notice how very quickly we collectively dropped "Next" in favor of "5e" as soon as WotC called it 5e for the first time?

 

[Hand of Evil]

PS: Did anyone else notice how very quickly we collectively dropped "Next" in favor of "5e" as soon as WotC called it 5e for the first time?

Don't want to confuse D&D Next with Pepsi Next. (Less sugar, more sodium)

 

[Mercurius]

Both, it is 20+ years in age and should be looked at, the design concepts in KGtWB would be helpful. Plus, 20+ years, gamers, their needs and wants have changed. WotC marketing plan in the past and does not seem to be changing is to just keeps rehashing the old material, not providing something new.

I hear that and agree with you to an extent, especially aesthetically. But I also see good commercial reasons why they went with the Realms, and also the simple fact that for every person like you who is tired of the Realms there are a few who still love it, not to mention newbies who haven't been exposed yet. I think it is a bird in hand type of thing.

For me old and dated means, it's been pretty much the default setting since the 1980's. Many people have been there and down that countless times. Sure they move the timeline around a bit, mess the pot a bit and such, but it's still the same setting. It's like growing up next to Disney Land and going 5-10 times a year for your entire childhood. You finally turn 18 and move half way across the country. Then, every time your friends want to take a vacation they say "lets go to Disney Land!" You're thinking Ugg. I've been there 100 times already, lets go somewhere else" but nope, Disney Land it is, over and over and over. It's an awesome place, but it gets old going back to the same place time after time. No matter where you go you know where everything is, and have seen everything before. Sure they may put a new paint job on something but it's still the same thing.

In the end, I'm certainly not upset, just disappointed. There are enough other campaign worlds out there that it won't effect my gaming, I just would have like to have seen some new, fresh stuff that was created specifically for 5th.

I hear you. But let's apply this to Greyhawk and just about every other WotC/TSR setting. Nentir Vale is the newest at six years, and then Eberron at, what, 10 years?

I too would like to see a new setting, and I think we will. But part of what WotC is trying to do with 5E is not throw the entire legacy of the game out but celebrate it. I get it, even as I look forward to exploring a new setting.

Me too, but I think the 5e design team made the right decision to go with FR. This is an edition specifically designed after a long, hard look back at the rich history of D&D. One of its goals is to bring together players of all editions. In that light, it makes a lot of sense to have the initial releases focus on an existing setting, and not create something new.

Yup.

I'd very much like to see a new D&D setting created specifically with the 5e rule-set in mind, but I'm content to wait a few years for that. I'm fine if WotC first revisits a few more classic settings. From an innovation point of view, I'd also rather WotC have a couple of year's more experience with the 5e system before designing a new setting; I think Eberron befitted from being a 3.5e line instead of a 3.0 line.

I think this is likely what we're going to see. But I think we're going to see some of the classic settings licensed out to third parties to create like they did with Tyranny of Dragons. They might do the Realms themselves, but I could see Greyhawk and Dragonlance being done by someone else. Then they'll be working on a new setting in the background which they'll unveil in 2016 or 2017.

PS: Did anyone else notice how very quickly we collectively dropped "Next" in favor of "5e" as soon as WotC called it 5e for the first time?

"Next" is so 2012.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Me too, but I think the 5e design team made the right decision to go with FR. This is an edition specifically designed after a long, hard look back at the rich history of D&D. One of its goals is to bring together players of all editions. In that light, it makes a lot of sense to have the initial releases focus on an existing setting, and not create something new.

I'd very much like to see a new D&D setting created specifically with the 5e rule-set in mind, but I'm content to wait a few years for that. I'm fine if WotC first revisits a few more classic settings. From an innovation point of view, I'd also rather WotC have a couple of year's more experience with the 5e system before designing a new setting; I think Eberron befitted from being a 3.5e line instead of a 3.0 line.

PS: Did anyone else notice how very quickly we collectively dropped "Next" in favor of "5e" as soon as WotC called it 5e for the first time?

Hey, some of us have never used anything but 5E! Next was always super-jargon-y.

I agree that FR to start with was the right decision, and I too would like to see a new D&D setting or three for 5E, but at this point, I have to say, there's no point making another generic fantasy setting - any future settings will need to be something more exciting and distinctive than that. Especially as Kickstarter seems to be reviving higher-production-value RPGs in general, and causing stuff which would have likely been minor five or six years ago to attract a big following (Numenera, for example).

 

[Darth Quiris]

I sincerely hope that WotC will eventually do a few new settings for 5th edition. They haven't come out with a brand new setting since Eberron and every other setting they still use came out pre millennium, mainly AD&D 2e times.

WotC needs fresh new stuff and while using the Realms is smart as far as it is recognized, people do know it, and it's been their most popular setting for probably 30 years... they are doing this in part because it's the only setting where the novels probably make them money and that's probably the main reason why they are focusing on it first.

I'd wish the Realms would become Forgotten. I'd much rather see Spelljammer, Placescape, Dark Sun, Ravenloft and Eberron personally. All of them are way more interesting than FR.

 

[DEFCON 1]

WotC already has a bunch of other settings. They are all on dndclassics. Practically every single other setting they have done is available for purchase on PDF and all of the history can be used as-is. That's why they've released all of them.

Will the NPC stat blocks not work as-is in some cases? Sure. You'll have to do some reworking on that score. But everything else will work just fine. And if you were going to use your own setting you were going to have to build your own NPCs anyway... so doing it for The Lord of Blades (for example) shouldn't be any big deal.

Unless of course you want to complain about having to do it just for the sake of complaining that is.