Warforged, Kender, Multiverses, & Errata - An Eclectic News Summary!

WotC's Mike Mearls has confirmed that the D&D website articles will be starting up again - and that we should expect top see Warforged very soon. In response to a question about Warforged and Kender, he says "Yes, warforged will be up first - jury duty has messed with our plans, but stuff is moving along." In other news, Jeremy Crawford commented on the "default" setting of D&D and on upcoming errata documents slated for Spring.

He also commented briefly on the Adventurer's Guide rumours of later, confirming that "yes, the material will be available in the free PDF download" ; while some of the material in that download will also appear in the Princes of the Apocalypse hardcover, "there will be some exclusive stuff in the download". Regarding PotA, he says "I *think* it's in the 256 - 320 range - can't remember off the top of my head" - which sounds broad, as I mentioned to him, but he responded that "it's not so wide when you think in 32 page increments!" That's not all that's on his mind these days - we already know Chris Perkins is working on something slated for 2016, and Mike Mearls says that "I have the stuff we're doing in 2017 much more front of mind these days!"

[lq]Does the D&D tabletop RPG have one official setting? The answer is yes. That setting is the multiverse, which includes all D&D worlds.[/lq]

In other bite sized items, WotC's Jeremy Crawford commented on the concept of a "default" setting for D&D. "Does the D&D tabletop RPG have one official setting? The answer is yes. That setting is the multiverse, which includes all D&D worlds. The worlds occupy pockets of the Material Plane—sort of like planets but in a space shaped by magic and divine forces." This ties in with what Chris Perkins is working on for 2016, which he has previously stated as being non-Realms material.

Errata documents are also being prepared. Crawford confirms it -- "Errata documents are definitely on the way, starting with the Player's Handbook. They'll start coming out before the spring." He also commented briefly on the recent "announced/not announced" thing, indicating that "We won't announce products until they're ready. We do consider Greyhawk and others to be in 5E; they're in the core books!"

 

[gyor]

I believe some where I saw that it was straightout said that the player stuff that is in tye book, would also be in the pdf, I've edited my original poat ao it now makes sense, I was distracted during my original post.

 

[DMZ2112]

Just an observation:

If all the conflict in 5th Edition Dungeons & Dragons is set in the Forgotten Realms because the villains in question tried their schemes on other worlds in past editions and failed there, that still doesn't make the core setting of 5th Edition the multiverse.

 

[Dire Bare]

They have confirmed that the PDF will both include all of the player content from Princes of the Apocalypse and exclusive material not found in Princes of the Apocalypse.

While one should always take care with the vagaries of the character limit on twitter, the following exchange on Mike Mearls feed:

Question for Mike: "Question can you tell us the reason why the EE Adventurers Handbook is not coming out anymore. Will we still get the material?"

‏Mike's answer: "yes, the material will be available in the free PDF download"

Seems to suggest that material will be in the download. In other places, they say that the download will have some exclusive material not in the printed versions-- again implying that all the player material from the printed book will be in the download.

Yay! That makes more sense than my now seeming irrational fears!!! Thanks!

 

[dd.stevenson]

Probably not what they are planning

I zeroed in on this phrase, because it seems to premise your entire series of posts in this thread.

I think Mearls has been pretty clear that they're not planning anything, in the sense that they don't have a grand strategy nailed down yet. It's perfectly legitimate that they would want to experiment with a bunch of different approaches, without fully committing to anything (including "realms first") during the first few years.

 

[lkj]

I zeroed in on this phrase, because it seems to premise your entire series of posts in this thread.

I think Mearls has been pretty clear that they're not planning anything, in the sense that they don't have a grand strategy nailed down yet. It's perfectly legitimate that they would want to experiment with a bunch of different approaches, without fully committing to anything (including "realms first") during the first few years.

Well, to be fair, I have a grand total of two posts in this thread prior to this one, and one of those was just pointing to twitter info on the free download for the elemental evil line. So, I'm not sure it constitutes a 'series'. I do think I speculated a bit in another thread (in an additional post!) about ways they might find to support multiple campaign settings even though they clearly aren't going to publish a ton of printed material. Perhaps that is my series.

At any rate, I quite agree with you. I think they've suggested pretty clearly (Mearls at any rate) that they haven't nailed down the best strategy yet and that they will likely try a few experiments. But I'd be very surprised if they hadn't brainstormed a few different approaches and selected the ones that seem the most promising.

So, in that context, 'probably not what they are planning' was simply my way of saying, "here's one idea. My guess is that it's probably not one they will decide to pursue" I'm guessing taking their small staff and devoting their efforts to updating old material probably doesn't make business sense. I could be wrong, and they might find some clever way (crowd sourcing? licensing?) to do it. But probably not.

I will admit I'm very curious (as a thought experiment) about how one might support (and encourage) many settings in 5e without having to publish numerous products for each setting. One way is to tap a plethora of existing material. Another might be to pursue an online strategy using the community or different licensees. I'm sure there are more. And I suspect the WotC folk have thought pretty hard about these various issues in the context of their business. And it's not impossible they decided that providing general light weight support in the core rulebooks combined with dndclassics is what makes the most sense.

No idea really. Just curious.

Anyway, time to stop rambling.

Cheers,
AD

 

[dd.stevenson]

Well, to be fair, I have a grand total of two posts in this thread prior to this one, and one of those was just pointing to twitter info on the free download for the elemental evil line. So, I'm not sure it constitutes a 'series'. I do think I speculated a bit in another thread (in an additional post!) about ways they might find to support multiple campaign settings even though they clearly aren't going to publish a ton of printed material. Perhaps that is my series.

Sorry! I thought I was quoting the poster above you.

I will admit I'm very curious (as a thought experiment) about how one might support (and encourage) many settings in 5e without having to publish numerous products for each setting. One way is to tap a plethora of existing material. Another might be to pursue an online strategy using the community or different licensees. I'm sure there are more. And I suspect the WotC folk have thought pretty hard about these various issues in the context of their business. And it's not impossible they decided that providing general light weight support in the core rulebooks combined with dndclassics is what makes the most sense.

The big problem that I can see with other setting support is that their MMO is Forgotten Realms specific. Naturally I don't know how much money it brings in, but thus far it seems to be playing a big role in their cross media events.

There's also the OP factions which belong to the forgotten realms; but I feel like these would be easier to push into other settings.

 

[lkj]

Sorry! I thought I was quoting the poster above you.


The big problem that I can see with other setting support is that their MMO is Forgotten Realms specific. Naturally I don't know how much money it brings in, but thus far it seems to be playing a big role in their cross media events.

There's also the OP factions which belong to the forgotten realms; but I feel like these would be easier to push into other settings.

No worries! I was just surprised (and excited) to finally have a post series! Alas.

Well, I agree that, so far, they have focused their 'front facing' activities using FR. And they may well continue to make that the focus for their cross media stuff. Sort of makes sense to avoid diluting and confusing the part of their audience that isn't as hyper-geek as perhaps we are. But to keep their 'fanatic base' happy and growing, there might be no harm in providing low key online support for other settings. In fact, it may provide the grist for more stories if they eventually decide to diversify their cross media stuff.

But at this point in my ramblings, I'm just making wild guesses as to how their business works best. And I don't really have a clue.

AD

 

[MartyW]

If you like. You're not exactly known for positivity. I feel differently about things to you; I find relentless negativity hard to read.

You know, this post nagged at me the last couple days. At first, I brushed it off, but the more I thought about it, the more it seemed to be an unfair passive-aggressive characterization. It felt like an ad hominem attack to me (i.e. - My opinion is invalid because I am always negative).

I am a media critic. My choice of media is board and role playing games. I may be an amateur critic (not working for a for-profit newspaper/magazine/etc), but I endeavor to offer valid critique on issue I see within RPG and board games on my blog and social media.

I love 5th Edition and I've trumpeted that in numerous places on message boards, social media and on my blog.

But that doesn't mean that Wizards of the Coast (or other game publishers) don't deserve critique in areas where improvement could be made. Even when I critique, I almost always offer suggestions on how corrections or adjustments could be made on the perceived weakness.

Perhaps you didn't mean for that comment to be an attack, but it felt like one to me, and perhaps it was more cutting because I believe you to be a reasonable person who is an honest-to-goodness advocate for the industry.

Even though I've held strong feeling about the issues I've posted here, I think if you look back at my posts on ENWorld "relentless negativity" is an unfair commentary on my messages.

You are free to disagree with my opinions. But please don't dismiss them with what appears to be a a subtle put down. One wouldn't insult Roger Ebert (famous movie critic in the U.S.) as being "relentlessly negative" because he rated many movies poorly. He was offering his honest opinion on the media of his choice. I try to do the same.

 

[Morrus]

You know, this post nagged at me the last couple days. At first, I brushed it off, but the more I thought about it, the more it seemed to be an unfair passive-aggressive characterization. It felt like an ad hominem attack to me (i.e. - My opinion is invalid because I am always negative).

I am a media critic. My choice of media is board and role playing games. I may be an amateur critic (not working for a for-profit newspaper/magazine/etc), but I endeavor to offer valid critique on issue I see within RPG and board games on my blog and social media.

I love 5th Edition and I've trumpeted that in numerous places on message boards, social media and on my blog.

But that doesn't mean that Wizards of the Coast (or other game publishers) don't deserve critique in areas where improvement could be made. Even when I critique, I almost always offer suggestions on how corrections or adjustments could be made on the perceived weakness.

Perhaps you didn't mean for that comment to be an attack, but it felt like one to me, and perhaps it was more cutting because I believe you to be a reasonable person who is an honest-to-goodness advocate for the industry.

Even though I've held strong feeling about the issues I've posted here, I think if you look back at my posts on ENWorld "relentless negativity" is an unfair commentary on my messages.

You are free to disagree with my opinions. But please don't dismiss them with what appears to be a a subtle put down. One wouldn't insult Roger Ebert (famous movie critic in the U.S.) as being "relentlessly negative" because he rated many movies poorly. He was offering his honest opinion on the media of his choice. I try to do the same.

I'm sorry. It was meant to be amusing. I certainly didn't want it to bother you any.

 

[MartyW]

Accepted. I know how tone and intent is so hard to read on the internet. For my part, I will try to be thicker skinned as well. As I stated, I think highly of your efforts for the betterment of RPGs, so I did consider that there may not be any real malice.

All's well that ends well.