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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="hawkeyefan" data-source="post: 6859147" data-attributes="member: 6785785">Yes, the DMsGuild will be inconsistent. But it exists...meaning you can likely find the options you are looking for, and if more than one rendition of the option exists, you decide which is better for you. Or you use one or more of the renditions to create one that does work for you. As for the settings, why should they all have a chance? I mean, we can discuss the chicken or egg aspect of the supported systems being popular or the popular systems being supported all day....the truth is that it's likely a bit of both. But there are some settings that are clearly not that desired. Lankhmar? Why exactly does it deserve a fair chance? I mean, I like Fahfred and the Grey Mouser, but I don't need a D&D published setting for them. Plus, I don't even know what you would need outside of the core rules to actually realize a game set in Lankhmar. If the setting had remained that popular it would have thrived through later editions, and we'd see Leiber's novels in the popular fantasy sections alongside Tolkien and Martin. I feel the same is true of most settings, actually, which is why I think they're more likely to dip their toes into the settings that are either thematically different (such as Ravenloft) or mechanically different (such as Dark Sun), than they are on a setting that needs little to no modification to the rules as presented in the core books (such as Dragonlance or Mystara). I say all this not necessarily because it's what I want, just what I expect to be the case. The backlog of material from prior editions is there for story and setting inspiration. The mechanical aspects are what's missing....and most of the settings don't require a whole lot of mechanical work to make them ready for 5E.</blockquote>

Verification