Critical Role Tell me the selling points of Tal'Dorei / Wildemount, without mentioning Critical Role, Matt Mercer, etc.

[jeffh]

I don't follow Critical Role, though I'm glad it exists and have nothing against it or its fans. I know nothing of the setting(s?) for it and the marketing fluff for the books isn't helping because most of it assumes you already know Critical Role. What is unique or interesting or especially well-done about the setting material? Would the answers mean anything to a non-follower of Critical Role?

As a bonus question, there's at least three setting books for it. Are any of them particularly better or worse than the others? I take it Wildemount is narrower in scope - does that help it or hurt it?

 

[billd91]

Yeah, not gonna do that because, quite frankly, one of the nice things going for it is the campaign setting already has an audience of fans out there. That's a positive network effect that will make it easier for any DM picking up the setting books to recruit enthusiastic and interested players. And that's whether the DM personally follows Critical Role or not.

 

[Benjamin Olson]

Tal'Dorei is pretty much just another generic fantasy setting. That's not a knock in my book, that means that I don't have to do a bunch of research to get how things work, just because some designer had to show off how original they could be. But the real selling point to me is simply familiarity to people who watched the first campaign of a certain actual play series we aren't naming. If players are actually excited that's a bonus, but familiarity is what I really care about because it saves time on exposition and makes for players feeling more comfortable deciding what they should do. I'd totally run a campaign there if I had a bunch of fans at my table.

Wildmount has a bit more distinctive personality, but I only got a third of the way through campaign two and couldn't give the elevator pitch for it.

Unless you are playing with fans of shows set there or are a fan there is really little reason to bother with the settings. They have some cool aspects, but most fantasy settings have some cool aspects. The selling point is in how invested and/or familiar people you play with might be.

As for the books, the Wildmount one was an official 5e product with some cool subclass options and additional schools of magic for wizards, being the main use I got out of it. The Tal'Dorei one and the revision thereof were 3rd party products which also had supplementary material such as an alternative resurrection system and magic weapons that upgraded as the wielder progressed.

 

[Necropolitan]

The setting is homogenized and lacking in meaningful conflict, I would recommend against using it unless you want a Critical Role campaign.

 

[Savage Wombat]

I found them to be a good example of what other worldbooks should do, in terms of evocative, original locations and plot hooks. But they're not some works of transcendent genius or anything.

 

[overgeeked]

As far as I know there are only three setting books.

Tal’Dorei, published by Green Ronin. Out-of-print and wildly expensive on the secondary market. The book was originally published only two months before the actual play campaign finished, so it covered most of the campaign and could rely on that info.

Tal’Dorei Reborn, published by Darrington Press. In print. Mostly an update and slight expansion of the original.

Wildemount, published by WotC. In print and widely available. Published about 2/3 the way through the actual play campaign whose setting it features, meaning it had to stand on its own more and offer more content that was inherently interesting in itself.

They are both continent-based setting books in the same world, Exandria. Campaign 1 was set in Tal’Dorei and Campaign 2 was set in Wildemount.

There’s a bit more material in the Tal’Dorei books because they don’t have to follow WotC’s guidelines or limitations, but that also helps with the mechanics as the stuff in Tal’Dorei is a bit overpowered compared to baseline.

Tal’Dorei is archtypical heroic fantasy. Different areas to go adventuring in, basically. Lots of seeds or ideas for potential adventures, but mostly a generic fantasy setting. People with problems offering quests and some rewards.

Wildemount is more developed and themed. There's a greater diversity of cultures and governments, factions and organizations. It's politically complex. The continent is at war. A nation of drow vs a nation of faux-Germanic humans...with what amounts to magic-based Stormtroopers and secret agents. There are factions within factions. Spy agencies and intrigue.

While the main draw for either is the actual play, between them Wildemount has a lot more to offer as a setting, I think, than Tal'Dorei.

 

[Clint_L]

Exandria is my favourite campaign setting, by far, and a worthy successor to Greyhawk, while also incorporating most of the classic tropes of other D&D settings, particularly the Forgotten Realms.

It's essentially an 21st century version of the classic high fantasy setting. Much like Greyhawk, you have your basically Tolkenesque elements (i.e. the Dwarf city state of Kraghammer, the Elf city state of Syngorn) and your primarily human kingdoms that are loosely modeled on IRL cultures. However, these are much less homogenous now, so that even Kraghammer, Syngorn, etc. do include plenty of other species, even if there is sometimes tension.

You've also got links to traditional D&D settings like the Underdark, the Feywild, etc. And a pantheon plus historical events that riff on D&D staples. So the overall effect is kind of like pastiche D&D setting, updated for contemporary play.

They also have fantastic sourcebooks. Explorer's Guide to Wildemount is, IMO, easily WotC's best designed setting.

I'm not sure what is meant by the comment about "lack of meaningful conflict," above. There is plenty of conflict in Exandria: dynastic conflict between powerful nations such as the Dwendalian Empire and Krynn Dynasty, conflict against powerful entities such as the Chroma Conclave and Vecna, and all kinds of other options for antagonists (Illithids in the Underdark, transnational criminal organizations, and so on).

Also, I've run dozens of campaigns set in Exandria, and have had no problem making it feel like my own. The sourcebooks do a good job of getting you started but leave plenty of scope for you to do your thing. For me, it's the current gold standard.

 

[Black Dougal]

1. Vestiges of Divergence: Evolving artifacts (Dormant → Awakened → Exalted) tied to character milestones which is an easy way to create signature items.
2. Heroic Chronicle: Tables that link PCs to regions and factions, generating allies/rivals and instant plot hooks.
3. Dunamancy: Time/space/gravity-flavored magic, plus subclasses like Chronurgy, Graviturgy, and the Echo Knight.
4. Adventure-ready gazetteers: Regions and factions written with built-in conflicts and hooks. Wildmount even includes four or five starter adventures, it's been a while since I looked at book.
5. Cohesive mythic backbone: Gods, the Calamity, and the Divine Gate provide clear stakes with no stream knowledge required.

Bonus Question

I think it helps. Wildemount’s single-continent focus + current geopolitical tension gives you instant stakes and structure. You can drop in a new group and be playing “something that matters” by session one. If you want a ready-to-run campaign frame with strong factions and on-ramps for characters, start here. It’s narrow by design...and that’s a strength.

Tal’Dorei Reborn gives you a wider canvas and more player options which is great if you enjoy building your own arcs, but it asks a bit more of the GM up front.

• “I want a campaign tonight.” = Wildemount (starter adventures + Heroic Chronicle).
• “I want a rich sandbox with leveling artifacts and lots of options.” = Tal’Dorei Reborn.

 

[Aurel Guthrie]

The setting is homogenized and lacking in meaningful conflict, I would recommend against using it unless you want a Critical Role campaign.

If a continent at war, a multitude of major threats, elder evils that could destroy reality as we know it, dragons that can topple civilization, are not meaningful conflict, then what is?

 

[Charlaquin]

Notably, Exandria’s pantheon is the 4e pantheon (with the serial numbers filed off in the published books, though they used the original names in the show), plus Sarenrae from Pathfinder (also scrubbed of the name in the published books), ported over because the first campaign started out as a Pathfinder game and one of the PCs was a cleric of Sarenrae, so they figured it made more sense to bring the goddess with them when they switched to 5e, rather than make the cleric switch deities.