What do you think the new setting will be, from Ampersand?

[Wraith Form]

Ravenloft doesn't need a specific setting book since they can essntially merge Ravenloft into a future Shadowfell sourcebook. Which works for me.

What Dragonblade said. Also, I don't see Ravenloft working well within 4th edition's confines (with it's focus on combat, tactics & minis). Ravenloft requires a bit more....cerebral? storytelling?....approach to roleplaying, and 4th edition is a bit more in the rollplaying camp.

(With all due respect.)

 

[Obryn]

What Dragonblade said. Also, I don't see Ravenloft working well within 4th edition's confines (with it's focus on combat, tactics & minis). Ravenloft requires a bit more....cerebral? storytelling?....approach to roleplaying, and 4th edition is a bit more in the rollplaying camp.

(With all due respect.)

There isn't a rolleyes smiley big enough for this.

-O

 

[Keefe the Thief]

What Dragonblade said. Also, I don't see Ravenloft working well within 4th edition's confines (with it's focus on combat, tactics & minis). Ravenloft requires a bit more....cerebral? storytelling?....approach to roleplaying, and 4th edition is a bit more in the rollplaying camp.

(With all due respect.)

"Cerebral Storytelling" - clearly a thing of the past, long gone, destroyed when rollplaying rolled over roleplaying. Thinking became tactics, wonder turned into wargaming, miniatures replaced myth.
How did D&D lose these core tenets, and who on the 4e design team is responsible? Read it on ENworld first!

 

[ki11erDM]

There isn't a rolleyes smiley big enough for this.

-O

..............................:.:.................
..................t:............:t:...............
...........:.....jDEi:itjji;:...fDDi..............
.............::;fE###L,,,,,,,,ffK###t:............
.............:GLEjtt#K:.....;GLEtLf#G,............
..........:ifDEtt;;,;iD:..ifEEii,,,tLE............
.........::iftiit;j;t,iG:::iiLjtii,,,fD...........
.......:.:j:,::t:t..:,:;,,,,i:. ;it,,,;t..........
.........t:,..i.t,.::,j,,,,i,:. .;:i:,,:j.........
......:.t,,..;:t: .:,,,;,,,t,,:. .j,i,,,,j:.......
.....:.j,,..,::;  .:,,,j;;i,,,::..,t,;,,,,j.......
......j,,..:::j: .:::,,i;;j:,,::.. ;;;;,,,,i:.....
.....i,,:::::,:  .::::::;;t::::::. :i;;;,,,i:.....
.....i,:::::,i: ..::::::;;,::::::.  t;;;;,,,j.....
....t:,:::,,,t  ....::::i;::::::... :;;;;;,,,:....
....i::::,,,,:..........t;:........ :t;;;;;,,j....
...t:,:,,,,,t...........t;.........  t;;;;;,,,;:..
..:;:,,,,,,,t...........ti........   .;;;;;,,,j...
:.:::,,,,,,,.           ji           .t;;;;,,,,:..
.:t,:,,,,,,i            ji            j;;;;,,,::..
..j:,,,,,,,t            ji            j;;,;,,,:t:.
..;:,,,,,,,t            ji            j,,,,,,,,j:.
.,::,,,,,,,t      jLK#  ji   ;fDL     j,,,,,,,,t:.
.;::,,,,,,,t      DW##  ji   GK#GG    j,,,,,,,,;:.
:t::,,,,,,,i      ####  ti   ###Ej    t,,,,,,,:,:.
.j::,,,,,,,,      W##G  ji    WKW     t,,,,,,,:::.
:t:::,,,,,,,i           ji            ,,,,,,,,:,:.
.i:::,,,,,,,j           j;           ;,,,,,,,,:,:.
.,:::,,,,,,,,           i,           t,,,,,,,,:i:.
.:,:::,,,,,,,j          ,,          ,,,,,,,,,::j:.
.:t::::::,,::,         .,:t         ;,,,,,,,,::j:.
.:j::::::::,,,t:       j:,;:       j:::::::::::i:.
..,:::::::::::::,;;;ii,:,:,,ii;;;,,,:::::::::::::.
..::::::::::::,,,:::,,;,,:,,;,::,,,,::::::::::i::.
...j::,:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::,:t:..
..:;:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::i::..
...:j::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::i::..
....::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::,,:...
..:.:j::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::t::...
.....:t:::::::::::::::DEEEED:::::::::::::::j::....
......::::::::::::::::EEEEEE::::::::::::::i:::....
.......;,:::::::::::::EEEEEE:::::::::::::t,::.....
........i:::::::::::::iEEEEt,:::::::::::,,,.......
........:,i::::::::::,:,:,:::::::::::::j,:........
.........::i:,:::,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,::::j,::........
...........:it::::,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,:,:j,,::.........
...........:::j;,:,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,tt::::..........
.............:::ij,:,,,,,,,,,::;j;,:::............
................:::tjt;,::,ijti,::::..............
..................::::::::::::::..................

Well that does not work to well but close!

 

[Silverblade The Ench]

"Cerebral Storytelling" - clearly a thing of the past, long gone, destroyed when rollplaying rolled over roleplaying. Thinking became tactics, wonder turned into wargaming, miniatures replaced myth.
How did D&D lose these core tenets, and who on the 4e design team is responsible? Read it on ENworld first!

I trust that's meant as an ironic joke?

I love 4th ed , but here's a secret any DM shoudl know:

Mechanics maketh not the roleplaying!
Good co-operation of DM and players does.

enough eidtion wars please, stick on subject

4th ed Dark Sun and Spelljammer would really cheer me up!

Birthright was a setting that was too "under done" IMHO, the emphasis on "few powerful folk" got in way of adventuring, which weakened the logic of D&D play, I think.
I'd rather Birthright had been more "gritty and low magic", rather than making it clear that only those with Bloodlines were capable of doing anything more than farting loudly at a goblin!
ie, if it was up to me, 4th ed Birthright would have two ranks of characters: those with Bloodlines and those without. Only Bloodlines allow a character to have any spellcasting (or psionic) ability, but, you pay for that and the rank etc, with having folk trying to kill you all the damn time, or maybe limiting your powers to within a specific country.
And double the level of magic items, making them rarer and less powerful.

The 1st boxed set of the Realms was beautiful, yes very Tolkinesque but you know what? that was a GOOD thing, so was vast empty bits on maps, beautiful, evocative artwork rather than "sexxorz stuff".
Note: the simple line drawings/cketches in the 1st boxed set was perfect, sometimes setting thematic style is much more important, than product style.
See Dark SUn, Ravenloft, early Realms and Spelljammer products.
The Realms got far too "civilizationed" *he sings a Danny Kay song in background* hehe.

basic D&D, Hollow World I never played so can't comment on.

Al-Qadim was interesting and fun.
Maztica I never got the set for, but sounded possibly interesting.

Ravenloft was great, but way it was messed around with all the time sucked!

Spelljammer too many folk couldn't "get", Pirates of the Caribbean wans't out or they may have. Some better rules on ship to ship fighting: simplicity-wise, would have helped.
If you can't get why the idea of yer characters ramming a Deathspider at high speed while standing on the deck of your Squidship, firing the ballista and Fireballs is bloody damn good fun...then, bah, yer weak sauce, matey!

I think the devs went a bit too far with planar changes in 4th ed. Planescapes concept of "Philosophy, BELIEF is what drives the Multiverse" was outstanding. The factions are really about what they believe in. That's a fantastic concept for fantasy roleplaying.
No damn use being a cross-trading lily-liver in the Planes, berk!
But again, to follow a demand TSR wanted, bah, the factions got "officially" mostly wiped out.

Sigh. Don't mess up campaign settings: leave that STRICTLY to the players and DM!

 

[M.L. Martin]

What Dragonblade said. Also, I don't see Ravenloft working well within 4th edition's confines (with it's focus on combat, tactics & minis). Ravenloft requires a bit more....cerebral? storytelling?....approach to roleplaying, and 4th edition is a bit more in the rollplaying camp.

(With all due respect.)

The 'rollplaying' crack is unnecessary and obnoxious, but the difference in styles is, I think, a fact. A mood of Gothic horror and Ravenloft's general style ("making the moral choice is more important than making the valiant choice"--William W. Connors, DRAGON #315) is tough to mesh with the emphasis on reliability and predictability in 4E and with dragonborn, goliaths, devas, tieflings, and warlocks running around. Doing 4E Ravenloft would probably require substantial changes to one or the other.

Really, with 4E being the most self-referentially 'D&D fantasy' focused edition of the game yet (an honor it took from early 3rd edition), we're much more likely to see future settings based on the 'core D&D' paradigm--lots of magic, wide openness to new elements, and 'kill them and take their stuff' as the raison d'etre. If that's the case, then given all other factors, I'd say it's Greyhawk, Dragonlance, or Dark Sun as the most likely, in descending order.

 

[Barcode]

I never played more Dark Sun than a few sessions at Gen Con, but I liked it and I think it's coming back. The reason is that dark, apocalyptic settings tend to do well in times of uncertainty and turmoil. The youth in such times tend to eat up mainstream nihilism with a spoon. Witness that WAR's cover art for 4Eberron reflects this fact - they went with scenes from the Mournland, emphasizing the wasted landscape. This, for a setting with a stated theme of pulp adventure.

Consider also that WotC's main target audience is unlikely to have seen more Dark Sun than possibly a worn box set at Crazy Egor's. For them, it will be as fresh as anything brand new they might produce. They could pretty safely reboot/rebuild/reimagine the setting, chucking established canon out the window, and only offend a relatively small number of people, who let's face it, were probably going to be offended no matter what they did.

I also think that by the time they are into their third setting, there will be some market value in exploring new thematic territory. That's why I think Greyhawk is unlikely, as it would just be more high fantasy. They'll still want to have a place for the core races and classes, but it won't be as crucial. What they will want to do is provide setting support for their most recent releases - aka the PHB3.

 

[Obryn]

The 'rollplaying' crack is unnecessary and obnoxious, but the difference in styles is, I think, a fact. A mood of Gothic horror and Ravenloft's general style ("making the moral choice is more important than making the valiant choice"--William W. Connors, DRAGON #315) is tough to mesh with the emphasis on reliability and predictability in 4E and with dragonborn, goliaths, devas, tieflings, and warlocks running around. Doing 4E Ravenloft would probably require substantial changes to one or the other.

Honestly, I find Ravenloft tough to buy at first blush. To me, it's always been about mixing Conan with Count Dracula. It's just a funny mash-up that strains credibility. Adding a tiefling or a warlock will hardly break the setting any more than it's already been broken. And goliaths & dragonborn are no more inherently silly than elves with many-voweled names.

-O

 

[JeffB]

I think the absolute best fit for 4E (and what I'd like to see) is not a poll option- The Known World/Mystara (pre AD&D2E versions I'd hope)

TKW/Mystara or Mearls' Greyhawk re-do (mentioned here many months back) are the only things I'd spend the coin on personally. I gave up on FR last edition!

That said- my guess will be either of the D's.

 

[I'm A Banana]

The 'rollplaying' crack is unnecessary and obnoxious, but the difference in styles is, I think, a fact. A mood of Gothic horror and Ravenloft's general style ("making the moral choice is more important than making the valiant choice"--William W. Connors, DRAGON #315) is tough to mesh with the emphasis on reliability and predictability in 4E and with dragonborn, goliaths, devas, tieflings, and warlocks running around. Doing 4E Ravenloft would probably require substantial changes to one or the other.

Really, with 4E being the most self-referentially 'D&D fantasy' focused edition of the game yet (an honor it took from early 3rd edition), we're much more likely to see future settings based on the 'core D&D' paradigm--lots of magic, wide openness to new elements, and 'kill them and take their stuff' as the raison d'etre.

I agree. I think I would rather see Greyhawk and Dragonlance than Dark Sun and Ravenloft for this reason.

It is, however, kind of disappointing to me that 4e won't embrace are re-definition of its own terms. I play different settings to play different types of heroes, to re-define the kinds of adventures and the kinds of characters I play. Different settings appeal to me as different genrea.

It's kind of disappointing that 4e is all the same game, just with different names.