Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Urriak Uruk" data-source="post: 7816556" data-attributes="member: 7015558">Two things, one on the possibility of a "combined setting book" (one that puts multiple settings in one book), the other on the Rabiah scale.I actually find a combined setting book unlikely unless it focuses on planes that are less popular, or at least smaller in scale/diversity compared to other settings. My reasoning is simply that Wizard's seems pretty comfortable in 5e, and their problem going forward could be that they'll want more content easily available to develop. So why make a combined book for Dominaria, Mystara, and Dragonlance when you could string out the development cycle longer and make three seperate books?I don't think that standard extends to all Magic settings though; Kaladesh, Amonkhet, and Innistrad for example are all fairly small in geography, development and diversity (diversity used as how much the world changes from area to area). I could see the three of those in one book, simply because each one isn't strong enough to share a book of its own.Now as to the Rabiah scale; it's interesting how few worlds actually are low enough in the scale to seem likely Magic will ever return to them, and I believe the "likelihood of return" strongly correlates to "likelihood of getting their own setting book."Only three worlds have a "1," Ravnica, Innistrad, and Dominaria. Ravnica already has a book, but I find Innistrad strongly overlaps with Ravenloft; maybe they'll get a book together, but more likely Innistrad will never get a book unless it's shared with something else. Dominaria however is a strong candidate.Zendikar comes up next with a "2," and then Tharos as a  "3" (both are getting new Magic sets this year). I find both aren't quite as diverse as Ravnica/Dominaria, but at the same time are more diverse than almost every other Magic setting, so still possible they'll get their own books.</blockquote>

Verification