wingsandsword
Legend
Blackmoor was established to be in the ancient history of Mystara. I'm pretty sure it's a retcon, but they did establish they are in the same world, just with Blackmoor happening long before all the later Mystara stuff.
D&D General What are the "dead settings" of D&D?
Blackmoor was established to be in the ancient history of Mystara. I'm pretty sure it's a retcon, but they did establish they are in the same world, just with Blackmoor happening long before all the later Mystara stuff.
Jester David
Hero
We know from the survey how some breakdown: D&D Monthly Survey | Dungeons & Dragons
Like how FR is roughly as popular as some of the other big names, but gets more play due to Adventure Paths.
But I think now it would break down like this:
Dragonlance was popular in the '80s and '90s, but anyone who enjoyed that setting is likely 35+ and is only part of a quarter of the audience. And it was published in 3e. Spelljammer, Greyhawk, and the rest will be even more niche.
And Dark Sun and Planescape are probably in danger of slipping from B to C.
Like how FR is roughly as popular as some of the other big names, but gets more play due to Adventure Paths.
But I think now it would break down like this:
- A - Significant active campaigning: Exandria
- B - Large cult following: Forgotten Realms, Eberron, Dark Sun, Planescape, Ravenloft, Ravnica
- C - Small cult following: Greyhawk, Dragonlance, Nentir Vale, Spelljammer
- D - "Dead settings": Pellinore, Jakandor, Ghostwalk, Dragon Fist, Mahasarpa, Rokugan, maybe Council of Wyrms, Blackmoor, Birthright, Council of Wyrms, Mystara, Kara-Tur, Al-Qadim
Dragonlance was popular in the '80s and '90s, but anyone who enjoyed that setting is likely 35+ and is only part of a quarter of the audience. And it was published in 3e. Spelljammer, Greyhawk, and the rest will be even more niche.
And Dark Sun and Planescape are probably in danger of slipping from B to C.
wingsandsword
Legend
A big problem with measuring anything like this is assuming that online polls, surveys forums etc. really are accurate at measuring gamers.
That assumes people are participating in WotC's surveys (if they aren't into the current edition, having been "fired" by WotC as a customer during the transition to 4e and walked away from official D&D forums and social media, or otherwise having stopped paying attention to new releases) that's right out. They aren't on forums like this.
There are a lot of people who play D&D who aren't on forums, they aren't interacting with WotC on social media, they play their games with their friends. . .who often aren't online (or if they are, interacting with WotC or ENWorld or virtual tabletops or whatever aren't what they are doing).
You really can't measure that. That caveat belongs on any numbers about what editions or settings are played. . .that there can be significant enclaves of off-the-grid gamers holding on to older editions and settings.
WotC measuring things for market research, for customers who will buy things, is one thing because they're measuring their current active customers. . .but fans of older settings and editions are basically "underground" from that perspective.
When you're trying to measure who's playing old settings, the problem is assuming that fans of new rules are using settings from 20 or 30 years ago.
I remember making some friends circa 2004. . .that had been playing AD&D 1st edition since the early 80's, they'd played for over 20 years with the same group of friends and family (and new family members as they were born and grew up). They generally stopped paying attention to new releases when 2e came out, I think they said the 1e Greyhawk hardcover was their last book they'd bought. They eventually modernized to 3.5 circa 2005, but still play 3.5 with Greyhawk even to this day, they don't touch online gaming culture, and don't need to buy new stuff constantly.
I know a few people who are absolutely fanatical about Planescape, and consider that their favorite setting and the main one they run when they play D&D. . .none of them are really interacting with online D&D culture, they may have Facebook or Twitter, but that doesn't mean that WotC is anything on their radar, or that they're playing 5e (maybe a third to half my gaming friends still stick to 3.5, I'm fuzzy on the number because some prefer 3.5 but play 5e if it's all that's available).
That assumes people are participating in WotC's surveys (if they aren't into the current edition, having been "fired" by WotC as a customer during the transition to 4e and walked away from official D&D forums and social media, or otherwise having stopped paying attention to new releases) that's right out. They aren't on forums like this.
There are a lot of people who play D&D who aren't on forums, they aren't interacting with WotC on social media, they play their games with their friends. . .who often aren't online (or if they are, interacting with WotC or ENWorld or virtual tabletops or whatever aren't what they are doing).
You really can't measure that. That caveat belongs on any numbers about what editions or settings are played. . .that there can be significant enclaves of off-the-grid gamers holding on to older editions and settings.
WotC measuring things for market research, for customers who will buy things, is one thing because they're measuring their current active customers. . .but fans of older settings and editions are basically "underground" from that perspective.
When you're trying to measure who's playing old settings, the problem is assuming that fans of new rules are using settings from 20 or 30 years ago.
I remember making some friends circa 2004. . .that had been playing AD&D 1st edition since the early 80's, they'd played for over 20 years with the same group of friends and family (and new family members as they were born and grew up). They generally stopped paying attention to new releases when 2e came out, I think they said the 1e Greyhawk hardcover was their last book they'd bought. They eventually modernized to 3.5 circa 2005, but still play 3.5 with Greyhawk even to this day, they don't touch online gaming culture, and don't need to buy new stuff constantly.
I know a few people who are absolutely fanatical about Planescape, and consider that their favorite setting and the main one they run when they play D&D. . .none of them are really interacting with online D&D culture, they may have Facebook or Twitter, but that doesn't mean that WotC is anything on their radar, or that they're playing 5e (maybe a third to half my gaming friends still stick to 3.5, I'm fuzzy on the number because some prefer 3.5 but play 5e if it's all that's available).
Parmandur
Book-Friend
I am not in a Ravnica game right now, but it is pretty trivial to find people talking about their Ravnica games out there. Out of the 40 million people into D&D right now, some percentage is playing Ravnica, and I'm sure WotC has some data on that.
Flamestrike
Legend
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.
RobJN
Adventurer
The Piazza paints a slightly different picture of the "alive-ness" of some of these settings...
Aldarc
Legend
Why not use the MtG rating system? Thought it may be more difficult to guess without the analytic tools that the MtG team has.
From what I recall, Ghostwalk was essentially meant to be plugged into a given setting with the idea that the city of Ghostwalk could be a part of nearly any setting. Kinda like Green Ronin's Freeport, but far more niche.
jgsugden
Legend
I'd love to hear from anyone that has a significant role for Ghostwalk in their campaign world. I put something like Manifest into my campaign setting, but it never garnered much interest from the players. It has been referenced a few dozen times over the past 15 years, but they never follow the bread crumbs that would take them there.
I am in the process of doing a reset on that campaign world and will be shifting that city to a location that has more significance rather than making it so isolated.
Ruin Explorer
Legend
I just wonder what the percentage is. Is it 5%? 1%? 0.1%? 0.01%?
As for "trivial to find people talking about their Ravnica games", I've been searching for actual play threads/podcasts featuring people playing Ravnica now, but I wasn't initially able to find any at all. I found a number of ended campaigns from 2019, and a cool-sounding podcast, but that was also over.
I did find a subreddit for Ravnica for D&D, which whilst not super-active, is a bit more active than the Dark Sun subreddit, so there's that. Still, you'd hope so, given Ravnica fans are probably 10-20 years younger than DS ones (and thus vastly more likely to be on reddit. That's literally the only place I could find, but its something!
The DS subreddit being so much more active than the Greyhawk or Dragonlance ones (I mean, you'd kind of expect this, DL/GH players are probably mostly 45+ and thus less likely to be on reddit) does help explain why WotC might be so keen on it. Not because of the subreddit, obviously, but because they have data suggesting Dark Sun has a lot of people interested in it.
This also suggests, to me at least, something pretty interesting - that a setting featuring in official products is very important in getting that setting to a younger generation, and keeping that setting alive long-term. Why do I say that? Because I strongly suspect that if Dark Sun hadn't been a 4E setting, then it wouldn't have a subreddit nearly populous as the Ravnica one. It would probably still be less dusty than the GH/DL ones, but not that active.
So that, for me, bolsters people's arguments that older settings "should" get some kind of official release.
