[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.”

​

 

[Corpsetaker]

I would like to go back to the Forgotten Realms discussion.

The thing about FR, or any setting for that matter, is that you can make it into whatever you want. Forgotten Realms can be a living breathing world where events take place all over the world that can have ever lasting effects that you get to take part in or read about, or it can be whatever you make of it. Unless you are running a game that involves the entire world, you don't have to worry about what Storm is doing over here, or Alustriel, or Elminster. They may not even exist in your games and if you don't like them, why would you keep them around? If you want to stick with running a canon Realms then yes, but if you had that much dislike then you wouldn't run a canon Realms in the first place.

All you have to do is pick and area and go with it. You can pick the High Forest and be set from levels 1 through 20. The reason the Realms is used is because it has gotten the most attention from various authors through the years and it has some very iconic characters.

The problem right now is the fact that the Realms are being mishandled. What makes that campaign setting special is all the deep and rich lore that encompasses the world. It is not the type of campaign setting you decide to go book lite with because it really defeats the purpose and magic of the setting. They should have created their own generic setting and used these AP's to introduce it bit by bit.

 

[Mercule]

Huh? From my perspective, this is EXACTLY what they are doing! The core books ARE setting agnostic! The only setting products are the three existing or announced adventure paths . . . are you upset that they don't have the Forgotten Realms logo on the front cover? I don't understand . . . .

If you weren't selectively reading/quoting, it would probably help. Immediately prior to what you quoted, I said that I was concerned about their statements about the way the Realms would receive setting updates/support and that I wouldn't like that model regardless of what world was used. I have to assume that you're being intentionally obtuse, now.

For the adventures paths, they had three options for settings:

1) go with a classic, but less popular setting to launch our new edition
2) invent a new, generic fantasy setting rather than use the existing, popular generic fantasy setting we already have
3) use the Realms, because it's what most of our fans want, and it's generic enough that it can be easily ported to other settings without much fuss.

4) Give it a rest and support something, anything else along side the Realms.

I'm not actually convinced that "most ... fans want" everything set in the Realms. I'd guess that a plurality of fans do actually want that. I'd also expect that the majority either want it or are willing to accept it. There is a non-trivial subset that actively want something other than the Realms, though. If they announced anything that wasn't set in the Realms, it would appease the third group and not bother the middle.

What I'd like to see:
Year One: Support the Realms. Set the "Starter Set" in the Realms and do another AP or two there. Release a Campaign Setting or just a Gazetteer to put all the setting material in one spot. The Realms is the biggest seller, so it makes sense.

Year Two: Support Eberron (the #2 AFAIK). Set an AP there and release another Gazetteer or hardcover. If the Realms is that big of a machine, then make the autumn AP (assuming two a year is going to be standard) set in the Realms.

Year Three: Move on to Ravenloft (no clue what the #3 setting is). Release an AP and a setting book. Go ahead and use the autumn AP to support the Realms.

Year Four+: Rinse and repeat through at least a couple more settings (Greyhawk & Dark Sun would be my picks, YMMV). Continue as long as these publications pay for themselves.

Long term: Publish one AP per year in whatever the top dog setting is. Use the alternate AP to support one of the others.

That is how you build the D&D brand, rather than the Forgotten Realms brand. A savvy Brand Manager would know that he's sitting on a ton of separate brands. The D&D brand is only good for TTRPG and (maybe) video games. The published settings are where he could really suck people in. Of course, that could be what he's doing, just focusing on the Realms until it shows real fruit (say, a movie). To which I'd just ask that they toss us a bone.

FWIW, I'd totally buy every AP and setting book, if they followed my model, even those that I've traditionally disliked (Planescape, Realms). Knowing that there's a buffet being set, with each dish being expertly prepared to showcase the subject, I'm much more inclined to sample heavily. One of the reasons I rarely bought campaign settings is that I couldn't see myself using them, long term. Spending the time to be expert enough to run a setting in a non-generic way isn't a great ROI for one-off games. On the other hand, being able to pick up a full campaign for a setting would be awesome and make each one totally worthwhile. I'm sure some would call to me and I'd eventually loop back around, but that's what the annual FR repeat season would be for (for me).

Again, I don't hate-hate-hate the Realms. It has elements that I don't love and don't want to use, long term. I also don't want the D&D TTRPG brand to become synonymous with the transmedia Forgotten Realms brand (or that of any setting).

 

[Staffan]

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),

Tiamat is definitely a thing in Eberron - she's an Overlord with power over dragons who got kind of adopted into the draconic pantheon. She gets a sidebar in Dragons of Eberron. And Eberron hobgoblins are already fairly militaristic, so that part would fit as well. The main thing about RHOD that doesn't work all that well with Eberron is that it's shock-full of dragons, who are supposed to be aloof and mostly dwell on Argonessen, rather than act as enforcers for a hobgoblin army.

 

[the Jester]

This bothers me not at all. In fact, I see it as a strength. Forgotten Realms is Ed Greenwood's home D&D campaign (yes, I know it predates D&D), and adding cool story elements from other sources is classic D&D. I do it in my own homebrew, and I enjoy seeing it (when done well), in the Realms.

I just want to clarify what I meant by "appropriating" things here, because I don't think I was clear.

I've no problem with the FR using generic D&D elements, or elements native to other campaign settings. What I dislike is when that generic or other-campaign element suddenly becomes a FR thing; in other words, instead of being in the Monster Manual it's in a book full of other, actual-FR-specific monsters that are too tied to the setting, contrived or goofy for me to use (e.g. tyrantfog zombies, beast of Xvim, weird FR-specific goblin types that are pretty much, you know, goblins, etc). I'm not too interested in those; I would rather buy an actual generic MM2 that includes my generic monsters, but they have been sucked into the Realms vortex, possibly never to return (? who knows- the peryton made it back from Faerun to 'generic' D&D, so there's hope!). I don't want to spend my money on a monster book that is 30% to 50% monsters I can't imagine using. (I'm using the 3e Monsters of Faerun as my unspoken example here; it included the firenewt, giant strider, leucrotta and a couple of other great monsters, all of which are originally generic D&D monsters).

 

[the Jester]

For the adventures paths, they had three options for settings:

1) go with a classic, but less popular setting to launch our new edition
2) invent a new, generic fantasy setting rather than use the existing, popular generic fantasy setting we already have
3) use the Realms, because it's what most of our fans want, and it's generic enough that it can be easily ported to other settings without much fuss.

They went with #3 of course, and I can't imagine a world where that was the wrong choice.

I'd add a fourth option- make an adventure that doesn't use any existing setting information; that is, something akin to the 'minisetting' that Red Hand of Doom used.

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.

Interesting. I take it that PotA is on the "more generic, less FR" side of the line (at least as you perceive it)? Would you say that there are any FR elements that are vital enough to the adventure that it's hard to scrub 'em out?

 

[the Jester]

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."

Very good point, and one I hadn't much considered. Though, to be honest, I imagine that a Dark Sun DM is under no illusions about how easily she can convert, say, one of the early AD&D modules for her setting; with a few exceptions, generic modules have never been well-suited to the campaign settings that are more 'out there'.

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?

Nope! I would prefer a generic setting with suggestions for where to place it in the FR, GH, etc.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

I'd add a fourth option- make an adventure that doesn't use any existing setting information; that is, something akin to the 'minisetting' that Red Hand of Doom used.




Interesting. I take it that PotA is on the "more generic, less FR" side of the line (at least as you perceive it)? Would you say that there are any FR elements that are vital enough to the adventure that it's hard to scrub 'em out?

Names is pretty much the extent.

 

[Agamon]

Interesting. I take it that PotA is on the "more generic, less FR" side of the line (at least as you perceive it)? Would you say that there are any FR elements that are vital enough to the adventure that it's hard to scrub 'em out?

I hope I don't sound like a broken record, but I can restate my opinion on this. "Scrub" or "file" are the wrong words. "Wipe with a clean cloth" maybe. Perhaps, "sweep under the rug" is a better analogy. It's as easy as ignoring the few times the words "Harper, Zhent, etc" are used (and yes, just completely ignore them, pretend they aren't there) and change the names of gods and towns/cities, if you're so inclined. Bingo, no more FR.

 

[Agamon]

Names is pretty much the extent.

Not only a ninja, but much more succinct.

 

[Dire Bare]

I just want to clarify what I meant by "appropriating" things here, because I don't think I was clear.

I've no problem with the FR using generic D&D elements, or elements native to other campaign settings. What I dislike is when that generic or other-campaign element suddenly becomes a FR thing; in other words, instead of being in the Monster Manual it's in a book full of other, actual-FR-specific monsters that are too tied to the setting, contrived or goofy for me to use (e.g. tyrantfog zombies, beast of Xvim, weird FR-specific goblin types that are pretty much, you know, goblins, etc). I'm not too interested in those; I would rather buy an actual generic MM2 that includes my generic monsters, but they have been sucked into the Realms vortex, possibly never to return (? who knows- the peryton made it back from Faerun to 'generic' D&D, so there's hope!). I don't want to spend my money on a monster book that is 30% to 50% monsters I can't imagine using. (I'm using the 3e Monsters of Faerun as my unspoken example here; it included the firenewt, giant strider, leucrotta and a couple of other great monsters, all of which are originally generic D&D monsters).

I was both (slightly) annoyed and (greatly) loved Monsters of Faerun, and I although I don't look at it the same way you do, I agree it would have been better to fold those monsters into one of the hardback Monster Manual releases. The handful of truly FR-specific monsters really aren't all that tied to the Realms and work fine as "standard" D&D monsters, i.e. the "Beast of Xvim" could just as easily drop the association with Xvim and be called the "Beast of Random Evil God". And of course, most of the monsters in that book WERE "standard" D&D creatures!

But trade dress, logos, and titles don't bother me, and I never wasted much energy on bemoaning FR's "appropriation" of many classic D&D baddies. The monsters in the book were fun, the artwork was great, the print quality was superb . . . only downside was the skinny page count and softcover, but I didn't let those get me down (much) either. I was happy to add Monsters of Faerun to my Monster Manual collection!

Really, monster book or adventure path . . . all you gotta do is ignore the FR names (or repurpose them) and you're good to go!