[UPDATED] RAGE OF DEMONS! New D&D Storyline Features Drizzt, Underdark, & Demon Lords!

Following Elemental Evil this fall, Rage of Demons will launch a new storyline featuring Drizzt Do'Urden, the Underdark, and various demon lords from the Abyss including old favourites like Demogorgon, Orcus and Graz’zt. This will feature on tabletop, console, and PC. "The demon lords have been summoned from the Abyss and players must descend into the Underdark with the iconic hero Drizzt Do’Urden to stop the chaos before it threatens the surface." It begins with the adventure Out of the Abyss, which releases on September 15th for $49.95, and is being designed for WotC by Green Ronin Publishing. (Thanks to Charles Akins for that last scoop!)

​

Drizzt? WotC's Chris Perkins says: "Drizzt's role in the RoD story varies depending on the platform. In the TRPG adventure, the PCs are the stars."

Inspiration: "My inspirations for RAGE OF DEMONS were Lewis Carroll's Wonderland stories and EXILE, by R.A. Salvatore." [Perkins] So this is the Alice in Wonderland inspired story that's been previously alluded to.

Here's the full announcement.

"Today, Wizards of the Coast announced Rage of Demons, the new storyline for Dungeons & Dragons fans coming in Fall 2015. The demon lords have been summoned from the Abyss and players must descend into the Underdark with the iconic hero Drizzt Do’Urden to stop the chaos before it threatens the surface. Rage of Demons is the story all D&D gamers will be excited to play this fall, whether they prefer consoles, PCs or rolling dice with friends.

Following on the critically-acclaimed Tyranny of Dragons and Elemental Evil stories, Rage of Demons will transport characters to the deadly and insane underworld. Rumors of powerful demon lords such as Demogorgon, Orcus and Graz’zt terrorizing the denizens of the Underdark have begun to filter up to the cities of the Sword Coast. The already dangerous caverns below the surface are thrown into ultimate chaos, madness and discord. The renegade drow Drizzt Do’Urden is sent to investigate but it will be up to you to aid in his fight against the demons before he succumbs to his darker temptations.

Dungeons & Dragons fans will have more options than ever to enjoy the Rage of Demons storyline. The themes of treachery and discord in the Underdark are in Sword Coast Legends, the new CRPG (computer role-playing game) coming this fall on PC from n-Space and Digital Extremes. The epic campaign that drives Sword Coast Legends' story forces players deep into the Underdark and continues well after launch with legendary adventurer Drizzt Do'Urden.

For fans of Neverwinter, the popular Dungeons & Dragons-based MMORPG will bring a new expansion – tentatively titled Neverwinter: Underdark – in 2015. The update will see adventurers travel with Drizzt to the drow city of Menzoberranzan during its demonic assault as well as experience a unique set of quests written by the creator of Drizzt, R.A. Salvatore. The expansion will initially be released on PC and will come out on the Xbox One at a later date.

Players of the tabletop roleplaying game can descend into the Underdark in Out of the Abyss, a new adventure which provides details on the demon lords rampaging through the Underdark. Partners such as WizKids, GaleForce 9 and Smiteworks will all support Rage of Demons with new products to help bring your tabletop game to life. To really get in the mind of Drizzt, fans will have to check out Archmage, the new novel by R.A. Salvatore, scheduled for release in early September.

“Rage of Demons is a huge storyline involving all expressions of Dungeons & Dragons, and we’re excited to bring players this story in concert with all of our partners,” said Nathan Stewart, Brand Director at Wizards of the Coast. “I can’t wait to see everyone interact with one of the world’s most recognizable fantasy characters: Drizzt Do’Urden. Descending into the depths won’t exactly be easy for him, and D&D fans will get their mettle tested just like Drizzt when they come face-to-face with all the demon lords.”

​

 

[Mouseferatu]

I agree. I don't think my not buying something will sway any decisions. But I will know I stuck to my principles and voted with my wallet anyways. I'm stubborn like that.

I... don't know that I agree that choosing whether or not to support a D&D setting qualifies as a matter of "principle" one way or the other, but hey, whatever works.

 

[Mercule]

Let's be honest with ourselves. The accounting department? Isn't going to interpret lost sales as being about FR. They're going to interpret it at best as "adventures don't sell," and quite possibly as "D&D beyond the core books doesn't sell."

I'm not telling anyone to buy something they don't want. But I am saying, "Be aware of what message you're actually sending. It's not necessarily the one you intend."

Agreed. That's why I bought PotA. It's generic enough and promises to be a darn fun ride. I'd rather they not have Harpers, Zhents, etc. sprinkled about because I can't always tell when they're placeholder names used for a plot-important, but overall non-specific group vs. thrown in because some Realms fans might want to see names they know. I'm totally down with the former as an "implied setting" tool where I can scrub the serial numbers off. The latter makes me spend time figuring out whether it's important that that NPC is a member of the group and is going to show up in Act 4.

The line is very gray. I can't give you specific criteria. What I can tell you is that "Tyranny of Dragons" was on one side and "Princes of the Apocalypse" is on the other.

 

[Remathilis]

I would like it if each adventure was set in a generic fantasy environment easily inserted into any given milieu, preferably without a lot of things that tie to the existing world. Better still would be simply not setting every adventure in the FR- I have no issue with FR fans getting stuff aimed at them, but give us FR-haters something, too. Princes of the Apocalypse was chock full of Greyhawk themes shoehorned into FR; it could have been set in WoG. And yes, I recognize that the ties to the FR can be snipped with a little work. But the reverse is true- give us a Mystara module, and it's just as easy to insert it into the Realms.

I realize that there are practical reasons that WotC is mostly sticking to the FR, but it doesn't make me happy.

I find this kind of self-defeating. A generic adventure (say, akin to Red Hand of Doom, which uses the PHB deities but nothing Greyhawk or Realms-based) is just that; it doesn't fit in anything. I can't find more information on the people, factions, or what is beyond the edge of the Elsir Vale map* in RHoD. And as a "generic" module; it still sucks; it doesn't work in Eberron (No Tiamat, very different take on Goblinoids), Mystara (no Tiamat, very different dragons), Dark Sun, Ravenloft, etc. I MIGHT work ok in Dragonlance (assuming Tahkisis is using hobgoblins instead of draconians) but really, "generic" is code for "ok in Greyhawk and the Realms, your milage may very elsewhere."

At that point, you're just as well off if you HAD placed in Oerth or Toril; at least now I don't have to scour the map to find a location for it on one of those worlds...

Second, Your criticism of PotA defeats the idea of genericism. You claim PotA has "Greyhawk themes" in it; well, aside from the fact the original ToEE was on Oerth first, I fail to see the themes. So if PotA had been a generic module (say, put in a generic vale with generic stand-in deities) would you still be mad that the "Greyhawk themes" were being used on a non-Greyhawk world? The only major difference would be the Red Larch info would be a generic place nobody heard of and that the Realms would have gotten a section in the back with the other conversion notes. ("Place near Sword Coast...")

Well, it's different in that Pathfinder has built Golarion as its only setting since day one- since BEFORE day one, actually! Of course nobody is clamoring at Paizo to release stuff set in its other settings; to the best of my knowledge, they don't have any. (And if they do, well, then obviously they've set something there, since otherwise it wouldn't exist.)

People have clamored for a new Pathfinder setting since 2009. Golarion is nice and a lot of people love its Greyhawk expy/Kitchen sink flavor, but people wanted them to make an "Eberron" or a "Ravenloft" or a "Planescape" setting. Paizo has resisted, and Golarion today is as dense in background as Toril or Oerth is today.

I think there is a wise advantage to this; D&D (to my knowledge) is the only RPG (not labeled generic) that doesn't have a default setting. D&D has 7-15, depending on how you categorize them. Great for variety, but the brand is diluted by the fact that you and I don't speak of the same shared world they way a WoD or Pathfinder player does. (Ignoring for a moment homebrews; those exist for everything). So most players end up in their camps (Realmsians, Greyhawkers, Eberronites) and don't branch out. That divided the fanbase in a way Pathfinder has craft-fully avoided (so far).

 

[justinj3x3]

I... don't know that I agree that choosing whether or not to support a D&D setting qualifies as a matter of "principle" one way or the other, but hey, whatever works.

For lack of a better term. You get what I'm saying.

 

[S_Dalsgaard]

I am doing the same thing (voting with my wallet, that is). So far I have bought every single thing WotC has released for 5e, whether I had a use for it or not. This edition is so damn good, I want them to keep doing what they are doing. Unless they crank up their release schedule to where I can't keep up anymore, the only thing I see myself not buying is a hypothetical psionics supplement (psionics don't really fit my D&D world view).

 

[justinj3x3]

My point being I'm not going to buy something just because it's there. If I want RP material there are plenty of other books to mine. The 'buy something because it's available' mentality is what turned the US into a nation of debtors.

 

[justinj3x3]

I am doing the same thing (voting with my wallet, that is). So far I have bought every single thing WotC has released for 5e, whether I had a use for it or not. This edition is so damn good, I want them to keep doing what they are doing. Unless they crank up their release schedule to where I can't keep up anymore, the only thing I see myself not buying is a hypothetical psionics supplement (psionics don't really fit my D&D world view).

A very valid point.

 

[Kramodlog]

So, others have already explained why there's no functional difference, in play, between an FR adventure and a "generic" one; that it's exactly the same filing off of serial numbers. I want to address the whole "voting with your wallet" thing.

Obviously, you have that right. I would never suggest otherwise. I'm not remotely a fan of having all the adventures set in FR either. I want other worlds.

But...

Let's be honest with ourselves. The accounting department? Isn't going to interpret lost sales as being about FR. They're going to interpret it at best as "adventures don't sell," and quite possibly as "D&D beyond the core books doesn't sell."

I'm not telling anyone to buy something they don't want. But I am saying, "Be aware of what message you're actually sending. It's not necessarily the one you intend."

If it gets them to move away from APs and produce source and splatbooks, I'm fine with it.

If it gets them to say the PnP RPG market is not worth it and just move on, I'm fine with it too. Ryan Dancey did a great thing when he made the OGL. D&D can live on without the brand name.

It isn't like I'll buy D&D books just to make sure D&D survives. I want to buy them because I want them.

 

[Mouseferatu]

My point being I'm not going to buy something just because it's there. If I want RP material there are plenty of other books to mine. The 'buy something because it's available' mentality is what turned the US into a nation of debtors.

Oh, absolutely. By no means should anyone buy something just because it's there.

All I'm saying is, make sure you (not you-you, but generic-you) are sending the message you mean to send, and are aware of any unintentional meaning.

 

[justinj3x3]

Oh, absolutely. By no means should anyone buy something just because it's there.

All I'm saying is, make sure you (not you-you, but generic-you) are sending the message you mean to send, and are aware of any unintentional meaning.

That's the catch 22! Ashttp://www.enworld.org/forum/member.php?6785541-S_Dalsgaard S Dalsgaard stated above I want WOTC to get the message that 5e is being well received. They just need to put out a book on Greyhawk (for myself, replace Greyhawk for your own favorite campaign... and a book with more backgrounds while I'm being selfish.)