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!

 

[Parmandur]

WotC has washed their hands of "Canon" at this point: ask Greenwood, Perkins said he is the arbiter of canonicity.

 

[GarrettKP]

I'd say the Moonshae book isn't. Not anymore than any other 3rd Party thing written for the Guild. It's just a world guild, which isn't something we've seen a lot of on the Guild. I imagine it just presents and repackages content we've seen before.

The Border Kingdoms book is funkier. Being written by Ed Greenwood, it'd technically be canon. But unofficial...

Both products were written under the AL banner. WotC gave these companies permission to use these sections of the Realms for Convention AL content, so it is as official as a 3rd party book can get.

This also signals to me that WotC doesn't plan on using those sections of the realms for official hardcovers any time soon.

 

[gyor]

WotC has washed their hands of "Canon" at this point: ask Greenwood, Perkins said he is the arbiter of canonicity.

Where did he say that?

 

[gyor]

It's funny, we all thought the two setting we're actually settings, like Plan escape or Eberron or Darksun, or even like the MtG multiverse, instead it's Setting Guides to two very small, minor regions in the world, not even say, Al Qadim or Oriential Adventures (likely to be renamed Kara Tur Adventures).

 

[Demetrios1453]

It's funny, we all thought the two setting we're actually settings, like Plan escape or Eberron or Darksun, or even like the MtG multiverse, instead it's Setting Guides to two very small, minor regions in the world, not even say, Al Qadim or Oriential Adventures (likely to be renamed Kara Tur Adventures).

I don't think these are what they were talking about. After all, it's not even July yet!

 

[gyor]

I don't think these are what they were talking about. After all, it's not even July yet!

If it's not, it's a really weird coincidence that 2 products AL legal at least came out as campaign settings, when they just said that two campaign setting we're coming out. If they aren't, which I hope they aren't, then it's an odd twist.

 

[CapnZapp]

If it's not, it's a really weird coincidence that 2 products AL legal at least came out as campaign settings, when they just said that two campaign setting we're coming out. If they aren't, which I hope they aren't, then it's an odd twist.

The positive spin is, they don't count regional FR material to be a "setting".

 

[Ancalagon]

The positive spin is, they don't count regional FR material to be a "setting".

It would be tremendously underwhelming if this was it...

 

[CapnZapp]

It would be tremendously underwhelming if this was it...

So the positive spin on it, is that it isn't

 

[amethal]

Anyone who makes a character without talking to the DM first is already starting off on the wrong foot. An enormous percentage of homebrew worlds also have restrictions.

Or maybe the world doesn't have restrictions, but the campaign is one in which all PCs have to be members of the royal court of a human kingdom.

Or maybe the world and the campaign don't have restrictions, but the party of five already has two monks in it, and the DM really doesn't want any more for balance reasons.

I agree. I can't imagine joining a campaign "sight unseen".

The pitch for my current campaign was "I have an idea for a campaign I'd like to run in Golarion, but for it to work everyone needs to play an Elf or perhaps a Half-Elf." My players agreed. Later, two new players asked to join. They were told the current campaign had an "Elves only" rule (but the next one wouldn't). They were happy to play Elves and joined the current campaign.

Lucky for me neither of them turned up with a tiefling monk!