D&D 5E Which Classic Settings do you think WotC will publish?

[Urriak Uruk]

I have always wondered about how they should go about expanding setting with books given their cap per year.

Thankfully for Eberron, his published books seem to aim to match the quality (at least in formatting and art) of official D&D books. So at least that setting will continue getting support.

Ravnica and Theros though... sadly not so much.

 

[Mercurius]

I largely believe that the D&D team thinks Forgotten Realms is too big to tackle in one book. After all, they were able to give the Sword Coast a book entirely it's own, and have proven they can write sizeable gazetteers for just a single city. And looking at how Zakhara or Kara-tur got their own books in previous editions, I think the D&D team just finds that a setting book of the entirety of FR would be covering too wide a swathe of area, when they would rather go deep of many books.

You may be right, but they have the hallowed FRCS as an example of how you can tackle a big setting in one (big) book. Sure, it didn't go into detail about the world beyond Faerun, but that's the norm for big kitchen sink setting books (e.g. Eberron, Golarion, Midgard).

In the end, though, it comes down to money, and I think a well-made (FRCS-like) 5E Realms book would sell like hotcakes.

 

[Mercurius]

Thankfully for Eberron, his published books seem to aim to match the quality (at least in formatting and art) of official D&D books. So at least that setting will continue getting support.

Ravnica and Theros though... sadly not so much.

I think that's kind of the point of the Magic book, though. In a way they replace the old "theme" books. Rather than, "City Adventures" you get a world that is an entire city.

I could see them expanding Exandria, though, although I wonder if Mearls would just do that in his own publishing company. I don't know how the rights work.

 

[Mind of tempest]

Thankfully for Eberron, his published books seem to aim to match the quality (at least in formatting and art) of official D&D books. So at least that setting will continue getting support.

Ravnica and Theros though... sadly not so much.

lack of advertising is a problem as I have not even heard of these other eberron books.

You may be right, but they have the hallowed FRCS as an example of how you can tackle a big setting in one (big) book. Sure, it didn't go into detail about the world beyond Faerun, but that's the norm for big kitchen sink setting books (e.g. Eberron, Golarion, Midgard).

In the end, though, it comes down to money, and I think a well-made (FRCS-like) 5E Realms book would sell like hotcakes.

FRCS?

 

[darjr]

There are official Faerun Moonshaes and Borderlands stuff from Baldman Games and Gameholecon on the DMsGuild. Not just adventures, setting books too. But also ALOT of adventures.

 

[Urriak Uruk]

In the end, though, it comes down to money, and I think a well-made (FRCS-like) 5E Realms book would sell like hotcakes.

I don't doubt it would sell (all D&D 5E books seem to sell very well) but I'm not confident that a 5E FRCS actually would sell better than Planescape, Dark Sun or Dragonlance. Looking at the Amazon sales right now, the SCAG is roughly neck-and-neck with both Theros and Ravnica (#21, 22, 23). But Eberron is running way ahead (#14). Makes me think that people are more interested in D&D legacy settings that explore their own niches (Ravenloft is of course releasing next week, but it is sitting at #1 right now).

I've heard folks say that if the SCAG was more like FRCS it would have sold better, but I'm not so sure about that. I don't know which FR fans would buy a 5E FRCS but not the SCAG.

 

[Mercurius]

Other: They'll want to push new settings rather than classic ones.

1. Far too many old setting have stuff in them that would be problematic today but are core to the setting's identity or structure. Things that, if left in, will cause bad press, but if removed will kill the nostalgia value. Brand-new settings can work in whatever new ideas / changes they want.

I think (or at least hope) this is way overstated. Sure, some people will find elements of older settings "problematic," but some people will find almost anything problematic and WotC has to draw the line somewhere. I'd say it is somewhere between "drow have black skin because they were cursed" and "there are slaves in this world."

2. MtG is much more popular the DnD (for now), so those settings will bring in more potential readers, while allowing cross-marketing. It's just better use of the IP they own.

Of the classics, though: Dark Sun, some sort of planar-focused hybrid (at least Planescape and Spelljammer), and probably more FR.

As the classic meme goes, why can't we do both? It seems clear that WotC agrees. Five settings over the last four years, including two classics, two Magic, and one new. I'm guessing they'll continue with a similar ratio going forward, although with two per year. So we might see something like:

2021: Ravenloft, Dragonlance
2022: Planescape, Magic
2023: Dark Sun, Exandria 2 (or new setting)
2024: Greyhawk, Magic
2025: Forgotten Realms, Magic

Etc. Or something like that. That's actually heavily weighted towards classic, but unless they up the Magic settings to one a year and/or don't publish two settings, it kind of makes sense.

Also, my hope is that they sprinkle in a surprise or two.

 

[Urriak Uruk]

There are official Faerun Moonshaes and Borderlands stuff from Baldman Games and Gameholecon on the DMsGuild. Not just adventures, setting books too. But also ALOT of adventures.

Those aren't official, even if their original creators (Ed Greenwood, Douglas Niles) worked on theme. Exploring Eberron isn't official either. Doesn't mean they aren't good supplements, but they need to be worked on by the main D&D-WotC team to be official releases.

EDIT: The best quality FR books on the DMsGuild IMO, are Darkhold: Secrets of the Zhentarim, and The Border Kingdoms: A Forgotten Realms. Campaign Supplement

 

[Mercurius]

I don't doubt it would sell (all D&D 5E books seem to sell very well) but I'm not confident that a 5E FRCS actually would sell better than Planescape, Dark Sun or Dragonlance. Looking at the Amazon sales right now, the SCAG is roughly neck-and-neck with both Theros and Ravnica (#21, 22, 23). But Eberron is running way ahead (#14). Makes me think that people are more interested in D&D legacy settings that explore their own niches (Ravenloft is of course releasing next week, but it is sitting at #1 right now).

I've heard folks say that if the SCAG was more like FRCS it would have sold better, but I'm not so sure about that. I don't know which FR fans would buy a 5E FRCS but not the SCAG.

My guess is that we'll see those three before a new FRCS (see my above post, which is just hypothetical, but also a tentative prediction).

I'm not a FR fan, per se, but I am a "settings junky." I did purchase SCAG but have barely touched it. It isn't all that fun to browse from a setting perspective (I'd much rather pull one of the 3.X white cover books off the shelf), and I haven't used the player stuff yet, so I suppose I'm an example of someone who would buy a new FRCS but wouldn't have bought SCAG if I had browsed it first.

 

[jmartkdr2]

I think (or at least hope) this is way overstated. Sure, some people will find elements of older settings "problematic," but some people will find almost anything problematic and WotC has to draw the line somewhere. I'd say it is somewhere between "drow have black skin because they were cursed" and "there are slaves in this world."

My point is: they don't have to draw the line. They can just ignore that direction entirely and focus more on new stuff.

Some settings won't be hurt by this (Greyhawk, FR), other are dead in the water because of it (Kara-Tur), but anything on the edge? Not worth the effort - bad ROI.

As the classic meme goes, why can't we do both? It seems clear that WotC agrees. Five settings over the last four years, including two classics, two Magic, and one new. I'm guessing they'll continue with a similar ratio going forward, although with two per year. So we might see something like:

2021: Ravenloft, Dragonlance
2022: Planescape, Magic
2023: Dark Sun, Exandria 2 (or new setting)
2024: Greyhawk, Magic
2025: Forgotten Realms, Magic

Etc. Or something like that. That's actually heavily weighted towards classic, but unless they up the Magic settings to one a year and/or don't publish two settings, it kind of makes sense.

Also, my hope is that they sprinkle in a surprise or two.

If it's two settings (new or old) per year, I'd only question Greyhawk or Dragonlance making the cut, but it's possible. If Greyhawk doesn't happen in 2024, it sure ain't happening. And it won't be classic Planescape, just a book of planar settings including Sigil (and probably/hopefully spelljammers.)