Two New Settings For D&D This Year

if it comes out this year i would agree with you. Possibly published by a third party company that has a good reputation (Green Ronin etc)

However if it’s coming next year I would stake all the money in my pockets that it will be a Curse of Strahd style book. Campaign with background and new monsters etc. Curse of Strahd was too successful not to repeat!

 

[MonsterEnvy]

I am perfectly fine with it being isolated in that is it hard to get to and even harder to leave. And I don't think the people here arguing disagree with that.

 

[AmerginLiath]

Coming back to this thread after a few days away, expecting to discuss settings ideas...

View attachment 98323

 

[kenmarable]

Not that this is relevant to the original topic, or if anyone is concerned, but (although I never got to play it much, so I could be wrong) but I always thought 4e was a great fit for Dark Sun even before they published it.

But I also have no problem with a setting that expands upon or breaks the core rules. The original Dark Sun rules when they first came out were really fun and groundbreaking with how they altered the core rules. I’d like more imaginative settings like that rather than less or forcing them to be another rule set.

 

[Remathilis]

I am perfectly fine with it being isolated in that is it hard to get to and even harder to leave. And I don't think the people here arguing disagree with that.

I don't, as long as when they DO get out, they are horribly broken munchkin machines compared to characters from other settings.

 

[Mouseferatu]

Dark Sun is the only one of the classic WORLDS OF D&D that repeatedly breaks the game's assumptions.

See, to me? That's a flaw with the design of other settings, not with Dark Sun. No, I don't think all settings should break some of the game's assumptions, but I do think many should. I like that sort of thing. I like creators putting theme, mood, and aesthetic ahead of rules.

It's one of several reasons that the upcoming Lost Citadel setting cuts and replaces about half the core classes: Because that was the only way to make the assumptions of the setting logically cohere.

(I don't think I've just spoiled something that hasn't been revealed, but if so, consider that a special sneak glimpse. )

It doesn't need to, of course. Primeval Thule has much of that Conan-pulp world feel with few if any changes to the core rules.

And while I can't speak for myself--I haven't read through PT in detail, let alone played it--I have seen a lot of complaints, from people who otherwise like the setting, that the mechanics don't support the flavor or the theme, in terms of it being low-magic. I would bet that, were you to take a statistically solid survey, you'd find at least a significant minority who would have preferred more mechanical differentiation from the core.

I mean, you and I have had this discussion before. I know I'm not going to convince you, any more than you're going to convince me. But I still wanted to point out that what you see as a bug, many of us see as a primary feature.

 

[Jester David]

Coming back to this thread after a few days away, expecting to discuss settings ideas...

View attachment 98323

This thread is ENWorld in a nutshell...

 

[Rhylthar]

And while I can't speak for myself--I haven't read through PT in detail, let alone played it--I have seen a lot of complaints, from people who otherwise like the setting, that the mechanics don't support the flavor or the theme, in terms of it being low-magic. I would bet that, were you to take a statistically solid survey, you'd find at least a significant minority who would have preferred more mechanical differentiation from the core.

I really like Primeval Thule (and I wouldn´t complain) but I can understand people who want a different approach to this setting.

Could it work? Sure, just take a look at Adventures in Middle-earth. You will find 5E in these books but a lot of different mechanics, too. Middle-earth has a complete different theme than the "standard" D&D-Settings.

I´m not really familiar with Dark Sun but I think, it could work. Problems will arise when players want to start cross-overs with other D&D Worlds.

 

[Tiles]

In the last game of The Stream of Many Eyes, Mike M was the DM in a one shot featuring their heavyweight players. Mike seemed almost giddy to have players from the different planes. Dark Sun, Nine Hells, .... possible nod to a manual of the planes? (Strix’s!!)

 

[Bitbrain]

Coming back to this thread after a few days away, expecting to discuss settings ideas...

View attachment 98323

That's Dark Sun for you. The gods rolled a 1.

 

[Remathilis]

See, to me? That's a flaw with the design of other settings, not with Dark Sun. No, I don't think all settings should break some of the game's assumptions, but I do think many should. I like that sort of thing. I like creators putting theme, mood, and aesthetic ahead of rules.

It's one of several reasons that the upcoming Lost Citadel setting cuts and replaces about half the core classes: Because that was the only way to make the assumptions of the setting logically cohere.

(I don't think I've just spoiled something that hasn't been revealed, but if so, consider that a special sneak glimpse. ).

Yeah, that is a primal and fundamental disagreement we're never going to get past, because I see little value in arbitrarily restricting options based on that designers interpretation of the theme, tone or mood.

Moreover, I (perhaps unfairly) hold WotC to a different standard than you, or me, or even other companies like Necromancer or Green Ronin, because they get to use the DUNGEONS & DRAGONS (TM) name on their product. The fact they can put the D&D name on their cover and you can't holds them to a higher level of compatibility with the main game. They need to make a setting work for new players, players who might never own any other book than the PHB but want to play in AL, casual players who just watched Critical Role, and a slew of other non-hardcore players that don't match the tastes of you or I. The easiest way to do so it to only remove things when absolutely necessary.

Only dedicated hobbiests are going to hear about The Lost Citadel (I hadn't until you just mentioned it) so have hardcore dedicated players who love to tinker and decide if X fits in it or not is fine, but WotC isn't going to market Dark Sun to the same audience, they are going to market it to Tommy Newplayer and Gina Streamer, and those two aren't going to be happy finding out half their PHB is incompatible with their shiny new $50 campaign setting book. If you want a Dark Sun that matches the customized ruleset that Lost Citadel, then you have to expect it well sell to the same dedicated hobbiests and the same lower sales numbers. And considering WotC just topped several nonfiction best-seller charts with MToF, I'm guessing they are willing to cede the small pool of dedicated craft hobbiests for the larger market of casuals...

So the question is really, will WotC be willing to accept smaller sale numbers in order to cater to more niche markets, or will they opt to cast the widest net possible even if it means diluting the settings to fit elven paladins in it? I'm guessing the latter. Whether that's good or bad we'll agree to disagree.