WotC Why WotC SHOULD Make A New Setting

[Parmandur]

It is so strange that some folks want to fight against the simplest reason: it is fun to be excited for official D&D things.

Sure, I mean, there is a lot of thst Togo around already?

 

[Reynard]

I don’t understand what possible point can be made for saying Ptolus, a magical setting that is entirely based in a massive city is not urban fantasy versus a fantasy version of New York or London.

Because a key defining feature of "Urban Fantasy" the genre is that it is set in the contemporary world (or a second world very, very close to it). I don't quite understand what the confusion is.

 

[Parmandur]

I still feel like the point is being missed. My fantasy city full of magic is New Crobuzon, yours is a fantasy version of Underground London like Neverwhere. Both exclusively use an urban setting as a backdrop. They typically explore the same themes of dystopia, urban blight, classism, etc.

I don’t understand what possible point can be made for saying Ptolus, a magical setting that is entirely based in a massive city is not urban fantasy versus a fantasy version of New York or London.

You are being overly literal about a standard term of convenience: "Urban Fantasy" is less of a mouthful than "non-secondary world fantasy set in a contemporary context familiar to readers except with magic".

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

WotC/D&D haven't had an urban fantasy setting or book since Urban Arcana for D20 Modern back in 2003.

That said, urban fantasy as a genre probably peaked 15 years ago. While it probably is a hole that should eventually be plugged, cozy fantasy and romantasy are far more popular now and it would probably make better business sense to create settings around those.

Cozy fantasy could also be slotted into the Forgotten Realms pretty easily, which historically has had plenty of content that wasn't just about swords and magic. We know all about what baked goods and non-alcoholic beverages are available in the Realms, thanks to Ed Greenwood, and it'd just be a matter of assembling all that content in one place, creating some campaign frames around cozy fantasy and creating the obligatory extra crunch and you're all set.

 

[Parmandur]

Because a key defining feature of "Urban Fantasy" the genre is that it is set in the contemporary world (or a second world very, very close to it). I don't quite understand what the confusion is.

The upcoming Ghostblood trilogy by Brandon Sanderson is going to be an interesting question of genre definitions: the setting is 1980s Cold War like tech level and social structure, with computers and cars and such, but is fully secondary world.

 

[Reynard]

The upcoming Ghostblood trilogy by Brandon Sanderson is going to be an interesting question of genre definitions: the setting is 1980s Cold War like tech level and social structure, with computers and cars and such, but is fully secondary world.

Aren't the later Mistborn books basically noir second world urban fantasy?

 

[Artamo]

The genre terms are well established. That doesn't mean there aren't fuzzy line or corner cases, but you having an internal, personal definition based on your understanding of the words does not have any impact on the existence or viability of the genre terminology.

I’m not going to play the terminology game. Suffice to say, you’re not the only person confused by the term.

I have no idea what you mean by this.

It means other people are satisfied that WotC has done new settings. You aren’t because your definition is very exacting. WotC is unlikely to satisfy everyone. I think Ptolus is very much an urban fantasy but you do not. I think WotC has done urban fantasy with Ravnica. I’m guessing you don’t.

 

[Reynard]

That said, urban fantasy as a genre probably peaked 15 years ago.

I don't think that matters. After all, they are making Dark Sun and Swords and Sandals peaked more like 70 years ago.

 

[Artamo]

Because a key defining feature of "Urban Fantasy" the genre is that it is set in the contemporary world (or a second world very, very close to it). I don't quite understand what the confusion is.

As defined by whom?

 

[Reynard]

I’m not going to play the terminology game.

If you reject the terminology, there really is not anything to talk about, is there?