D&D 5E What of the already done settings do you think WotC is revisiting for a Setting Book?

[Parmandur]

It focuses on such a tiny part of the setting it doesn't even meet the low bar of CoS, which WotC didn't count as a visit given Ravenloft is concidered one of the classic settings, not a revisit.

Why is Van Richten's not considered a "revisit" explicitly? I could see it readily being viewed as such. Ghosts of Saltmarsh covers a several hex area of the Greyhawk map, and contains a rather significant amount if Setting exposition. A larger area than Barovia, I believe, and more expandable on the face of it.

 

[Parmandur]

I was just rereading the Winninger quote that started this all, and something occured to me. In addition to the two new settings and the one revisited setting (all three of which he says might not happen), two classic setting products are coming. Everyone has interpreted this to mean that two classic settings wil be revisited, one per product.

But what Winninger actually writes is this: "...there are two more products that revive 'classic' settings in production right now." One of them is by Perkins (almost certainly an adventure path, quite possibly Dragonlance). The other is being headed up by Schneider and Levitch.

Now, I'm not saying this is likely—probably the default assumption is correct and each of these products is for one and only one classic setting—but it's entirely consistent with what he wrote that the Schneider and Levitch product could be for more than one classic setting.

Well, I think it is probably two Setting books for two Settings. I think Perkins might be doing Planescape, and Schneider/Leitch maybe Dark Sun, but time shall tell.

 

[Henadic Theologian]

Why is Van Richten's not considered a "revisit" explicitly? I could see it readily being viewed as such. Ghosts of Saltmarsh covers a several hex area of the Greyhawk map, and contains a rather significant amount if Setting exposition. A larger area than Barovia, I believe, and more expandable on the face of it.

They stuck it in the classic setting category, not the revisit category, not me.

 

[Urriak Uruk]

Well, I think it is probably two Setting books for two Settings. I think Perkins might be doing Planescape, and Schneider/Leitch maybe Dark Sun, but time shall tell.

Has Perkins ever been the lead on a 5E book that isn't mostly adventure? Legit curious, as it seems odd he is leading a setting book.

 

[Parmandur]

That's a good point. Touché. In that sense, it's a little bit more akin to Curse of Strahd or Storm King's Thunder, because it has to establish the assumed setting details in addition to providing the adventure. I'm assuming that other AL books will continue to do this, though, such as Wild Beyond the Witchlight - they need to establish the part of the Feywild they're in and what sort of things are going to be around there.

It has been the general rule for Adventures, for sure. Saltmarsh included a lot of incidental world information above and beyond, though, to really situate the game in Greyhawk.

 

[Parmandur]

Has Perkins ever been the lead on a 5E book that isn't mostly adventure? Legit curious, as it seems odd he is leading a setting book.

Eberron: Rising from the Last War was Perkin's project as lead. Also, the Player's Handbook, IIRC.

 

[Henadic Theologian]

It has been the general rule for Adventures, for sure. Saltmarsh included a lot of incidental world information above and beyond, though, to really situate the game in Greyhawk.

It also had stuff to put it in FR and Mystara.

 

[Parmandur]

Has Perkins ever been the lead on a 5E book that isn't mostly adventure? Legit curious, as it seems odd he is leading a setting book.

And he did a lot of Setting work in 3E (Eberron wise).

 

[Parmandur]

It also had stuff to put it in FR and Mystara.

A few sentences in a sidebar, as opposed to details on God's, politics, Cale dar, factions, etc. for Greyhawk. We're talking a significant portion of the books Greyhawk Gazateer.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

View attachment 141097

I'm 90% sure that no one actually likes the Forgotten Realms, but that it just keeps getting published because everyone's familiar with it. People just pretended to like it in order to have even more reasons to be mad at D&D 4e.

I'm joking a bit here, but I seriously do think that the Forgotten Realms is way over-represented in D&D 5e books in comparison to other settings that WotC has said are equally popular, like Eberron, Dark Sun, and Ravenloft. Exandria is probably on the same level now (if not more popular than much of the other settings, as Critical Role is a huge money-maker and very popular), but WotC doesn't own the rights to the setting and thus would have to collaborate with Matt Mercer and the rest of the Critical Role team to make more Exandria books (which, although it would be well worth the profit if they did another Exandria setting book or an adventure in the world, it is significantly harder to do than most of the campaign settings they do have the rights to).

I don't think FR is the most popular D&D setting, I just think that for the longest time it has been the most recognizable. Recognition =/= Popularity