D&D General What are the "dead settings" of D&D?

Snarf Zagyg

Notorious Liquefactionist
Wow, so basically its completely arbitrary?

I explained why I ranked things the way I did, now, twice. It's a ranking.

Do you have either:

A. Objective definitions of "significant," "active," "large," "small," or "cult?"

B. Current real-world information regarding the campaigns being played that you can use to "rebut" what I thought was a fun ranking?

If not, you kind of seem like a jerk spoiling for a fight?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I explained why I ranked things the way I did, now, twice. It's a ranking.

Do you have either:

A. Objective definitions of "significant," "active," "large," "small," or "cult?"

B. Current real-world information regarding the campaigns being played that you can use to "rebut" what I thought was a fun ranking?

Re: A, do you? If not, why use them? All it does is mislead. Especially with category A. Category A has an objective definition - 5E D&D settings currently in print by WotC. That is 100% of what A is. So calling it "significant active campaigning" is straight-up misleading. We have no idea.

Re: B, no, but you were the one who said I was wrong because all I had was anecdotes, whilst literally saying you were basing your list on anecdotes.

It'd be fine to say "Well its my list, so my anecdotes count, yours don't!". I'd have laughed, but you can't say "I don't use anecdotes" and literally then turn around and say your opinion on GH is due to your own anecdotal evidence! :D

If not, you kind of seem like a jerk spoiling for a fight?

PKB, mate :) You're the one who was initially rather rude and dismissive to what were merely suggestions. I wasn't saying CHANG UR LIST NOW FOOL, I was saying "I don't think that's quite right" and asking about the methodology (which I'd missed). But you treated it as the former.

And I think a genuine issue remains, which is that you have a clear double-standard by your own definitions with Ravenloft/Greyhawk in 5E. Both are actively played in 5E because there's an AP set there (and I suspect groups stay with those settings post-AP to some extent).
 

Snarf Zagyg

Notorious Liquefactionist
Re: A, do you? If not, why use them?

Because it's from the OP. I copied the format of the original post in this thread. I assumed it was obvious.

You really do like to argue? Okay. I'm not the person for it.

And no, no smiley emoticons. I think you were being hostile, and I don't care to engage with whatever issue it is that you have.
 


Voadam

Legend
All settings are dead to me. I home-brew only.

In the 80s-90s I used to buy a lot of setting boxes, modules and novels for inspiration but I don't do that anymore.

The only setting book I bought for 5e was Sword Coast. I've resisted all other temptations so far. I do buy generic 5e books like Xanathar's.

I would buy a Greyhawk (+Blackmoor) setting book if it there was enough meat around the bone and a nice map.

Lack of setting books and dead settings are a non-issue for me.

I'm the opposite but get to the same conclusion. :)

My 5e home-brew is a mashup of at least elements from a dozen settings (Golarion, Ptolus, Ravenloft, Greyhawk, Eberron, Freeport, Hamunaptra, Spiros Blaak, Diamond Throne, Scarred Lands, Forgotten Realms, Nentir Vale, Warhammer, Melnibone, Airdhe, and others).

I've got the 5e Eberron setting book and the MtG PDFs and tons of material from other editions and non-D&D sources.

I find settings interesting and I am interested in getting more but I also have more than I will ever read so "Lack of setting books and dead settings are a non-issue for me." :)
 

Parmandur

Book-Friend
Right? I mean, later Dragon is nowhere near as wild and wonderful as earlier Dragon (and this was very late, from my perspective), but it was fantastic to have content like this coming out EVERY MONTH. I mean it seems almost unimaginable now, right? And in a big glossy magazine you could lay around and read? Even digital stuff isn't remotely giving you that sort of content/month, not in a collected, well-edited, presentable format. I'm sure if one follows a few blogs and reads a few reddits, one can collect as much material, technically, and perhaps even of the same standard, but it's just not the same, to go around gathering up bits and bobs, as it was to receive a big honking magazine you could read on the soft or whatever.

I got so many good ideas from Dragon and Dungeon back in the day (and saw quite a few bad ones that made me go "Well now I know I definitely do not want to do that!", too!), and there was so much fantastic art. Which is the one thing D&D is bizarrely missing today - fantastic art. It's not like there isn't tons and tons of it out there. WotC themselves put out insane amounts of fantastic art via MtG, but D&D art for 5E just isn't great, as a whole, I think I've discussed this before, despite the odd good piece. Dragon had a lot of bad art, but it also had a lot of really good stuff, really inspiring stuff, too.

Go figure on the art: 5E is my favorite edition for art style, though I've enjoyed art from every edition on it's own terms. Whenever I get a new book, my 5 year old son flips through and drinks in all the art.
 

You know, I thought that maybe it had been a part of an existing D&D setting, but couldn't remember which. All I could remember about it was that the signature red steel had magical and detrimental effects, and that it came with a CD.

Red Steel is a part of Mystara, a 2nd edition expansion.

One thing that strikes me is just how many settings there have been for D&D, official and third party. It drives home the line from the Oracle fanzine reprint that "Dungeons and Dragons is a machine for creating more Dungeons and Dragons."
 

Parmandur

Book-Friend
One thing that strikes me is just how many settings there have been for D&D, official and third party. It drives home the line from the Oracle fanzine reprint that "Dungeons and Dragons is a machine for creating more Dungeons and Dragons."

I'm pretty sure the 5E basically says something like that...
 

atanakar

Hero
I'm the opposite but get to the same conclusion. :)

My 5e home-brew is a mashup of at least elements from a dozen settings (Golarion, Ptolus, Ravenloft, Greyhawk, Eberron, Freeport, Hamunaptra, Spiros Blaak, Diamond Throne, Scarred Lands, Forgotten Realms, Nentir Vale, Warhammer, Melnibone, Airdhe, and others).

I've got the 5e Eberron setting book and the MtG PDFs and tons of material from other editions and non-D&D sources.

I find settings interesting and I am interested in getting more but I also have more than I will ever read so "Lack of setting books and dead settings are a non-issue for me." :)

LOL!

That is what I did in the 90s. A big mash up of FR, Mystara, Greyhawk, Al-Qadim and Spelljammer influences.
 

Mistwell

Crusty Old Meatwad (he/him)
Ghostwalk was a concept piece, the type of setting that people played once and were done; I highly doubt anyone is actively playing it, except as the occasional lark.

Ghostwalk is an oddity in that it doesn't need to be it's own "setting" and can be associated with any other setting as an add-on. You can also combine it with a Planes book like Open Grave or a Necromancy book or Shadowfell or a variety of other combinations. And it's a self-contained book - you can add it to an existing setting and it needs no other materials outside that book for support.

Given all those factors, I'd say it's still in the running as more than "dead" for 5e. I can see how it could fit well with the 5e model.
 

Doug McCrae

Legend
These are the results of a 2015 survey conducted by WotC.

The popularity of settings in the survey fell into three distinct clusters. Not surprisingly, our most popular settings from prior editions landed at the top of the rankings, with Eberron, Ravenloft, Dark Sun, Planescape, and the Forgotten Realms all proving equally popular. Greyhawk, Dragonlance, and Spelljammer all shared a similar level of second-tier popularity, followed by a fairly steep drop-off to the rest of the settings. My sense is that Spelljammer has often lagged behind the broad popularity of other settings, falling into love-it-or-hate-it status depending on personal tastes. Greyhawk and Dragonlance hew fairly close to the assumptions we used in creating the fifth edition rulebooks, making them much easier to run with material from past editions. Of the top five settings, four require significant new material to function and the fifth is by far our most popular world.​
 
Last edited:

Voadam

Legend
Ghostwalk is an oddity in that it doesn't need to be it's own "setting" and can be associated with any other setting as an add-on. You can also combine it with a Planes book like Open Grave or a Necromancy book or Shadowfell or a variety of other combinations. And it's a self-contained book - you can add it to an existing setting and it needs no other materials outside that book for support.

Given all those factors, I'd say it's still in the running as more than "dead" for 5e. I can see how it could fit well with the 5e model.
Ravenloft can be an add on to any setting as a demiplane.

Spelljammer can be an add on as outer space for any world.

D&D has a bunch.
 

Parmandur

Book-Friend
These are the results of a 2015 survey conducted by WotC.

The popularity of settings in the survey fell into three distinct clusters. Not surprisingly, our most popular settings from prior editions landed at the top of the rankings, with Eberron, Ravenloft, Dark Sun, Planescape, and the Forgotten Realms all proving equally popular. Greyhawk, Dragonlance, and Spelljammer all shared a similar level of second-tier popularity, followed by a fairly steep drop-off to the rest of the settings. My sense is that Spelljammer has often lagged behind the broad popularity of other settings, falling into love-it-or-hate-it status depending on personal tastes. Greyhawk and Dragonlance hew fairly close to the assumptions we used in creating the fifth edition rulebooks, making them much easier to run with material from past editions. Of the top five settings, four require significant new material to function and the fifth is by far our most popular world.​

Source

A lot of time has passed since then: a not-insignficant part of the player base was still wearing diapers.

Something like the Rabiah Scale, but for D&D, would be awesome.
 

Voadam

Legend
These are the results of a 2015 survey conducted by WotC.

The popularity of settings in the survey fell into three distinct clusters. Not surprisingly, our most popular settings from prior editions landed at the top of the rankings, with Eberron, Ravenloft, Dark Sun, Planescape, and the Forgotten Realms all proving equally popular. . . . Of the top five settings, four require significant new material to function and the fifth is by far our most popular world.​

Some settings are more equal than others.
 


Minigiant

Legend
Supporter
I think the first 2 tiers would have to be:

A Officially Campaigned
B Officially Acknowledged


Settings with official books are on different tiers that ones with blurbs and mentions in books.
You can't die if the designers keep mentioning you.
 

Snarf Zagyg

Notorious Liquefactionist
Right, and Ravenloft got just that kind of 5e treatment as part of an adventure. I can see Ghostwalk getting it too.

Theoretically, a lot of settings can either be standalone adventures (Ghostwalk, for example), consumed by the Forgotten Realms, or used as connective tissue between settings (Planescape, SpellJammer).

There are very few settings on the list that absolutely stand alone and cannot be used or easily cannibalized into something else.
 

We just had a levels 1-10 5E official adventure for Ravenloft, and I'm pretty sure the stuff from Plansecape is referred to a fair bit now that the great wheel is back (there have been Sigil references etc, and decent into Avernus had a fair bit of references in there as well).

I'd give my kingdom for an official Birthright... anything really. Heck; just a reference in an official book somewhere would be nice. Faerun, Greyhawk, Eberron and Krynn get all the love.

I think you need to reread my post. CoS has very little to do with the Ravenloft setting. It contains none of the unique rules, few of the themes, and actively contradicts the settings at several points.

It doesn't even contain all of Barovia.

There's been valiant attempts by fans to detail the actual setting in the DMsGuild, but there is (and will not be) nothing official. WoTC's stance on it hasn't changed since they released "Expedition to Castle Ravenloft". As far as they are concerned, "Ravenloft" is merely the original 1st edition module by Tracy and Laura Hickman. Nothing more.
 


My suggestion is a new transitional setting based in the chronomancers and the time spheres, (and now the music of Doctor Who sounds in your minds).

Now the relation between Disney and Hasbro is very good. I wonder about if Warner produced Lord of the Rings, why not to allow Disney to produce its own version of Dragonlance? (Ok, Silvara and Goldmoon can't be sing like in a musical, we take note about it). This could be one of the best promotion of the brand.
 

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top