WotC comes to you and asks you to pick a setting...

[Ferret]

I'd just go with my default FR, I have no knowlege of other setting, but I am planning on getting Ebberon though.

 

[catsclaw227]

But then, I'm also one of those bastoids who think that 3.0/3.5 could use some bloody flavor text now and again.....

I agree. Though many would say that rules and flavor should be separated, with flavor defining the setting and rules just ironing out the mechanics. Church and State??? Hmmm. I am not of that opinion, I find it impossible, but to use tools like DM Genie or Roleplayingmaster, you need to separate them unless you want to spend time making a lot of custom attributes and values.... and coding.

Scarred Lands is very setting rich, yet integrates the mechanics quite flawlessly, so they become invisible to the setting.

I mean really.... what is more important anyway.... setting or mechanics? For me, it's setting and flavor by a landslide.

CC

 

[Mark CMG]

Tough choice. I'll go with "Grymvald"

 

[Nightfall]

*appreciates the support CC.*

 

[Coredump]

Being the hard-core professional contrarian that I am ...

... none. The best fit to the D&D game hasn't been written. You want a coherent world, a world that fits together and makes sense. An organic world, not something slapped together by tossing tropes and memes at a wall to see what sticks. You want to start anew.

Hey Mythusmage, in all seriousness, you should check out Kalamar. The most common compliment it gets is how it 'makes sense'. For example, the terrain was designed with a geologist with a mind towards weather patterns and such. The history is not developed around what a big powerful wizard did; but rather how empires developed and crumbled and reformed, etc. It was definitely not 'slapped together'. Many other campaigns strike me as someone saying "Wouldn't it be cool if..." and then making an entire world around one 'neat concept'. Kalamar is a complete world, not just a vehicle for a single idea.

 

[Pants]

I voted Greyhawk.

For a long time D&D WAS Greyhawk. GH helped to establish a lot of the tropes (both good and bad) that have become a main part of D&D. Monsters, spells, magic items, and adventures. Eberron deviates from what most people consider 'normal' D&D to be. FR is... well it showcases normal D&D rather well, but GH does it better IMO. Plus, FR uses some nonstandard races and rules.

 

[Nightfall]

*won't comment on his idea of "geography making sense"* But whatever. Kalamar, GH, even Eberron aren't exactly my ideas of fun...but there you are.

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

I voted for CSIO, but honestly I think it is UTTERLY irrelevant. The current use of Greyhawk as exemplar is, IMO, quite pointless - with the exception of providing a "default" list of deities. There isn't any genuinely solid information in the PH on how to incorporate deities or religion into a game setting except for listing those deities and the domains their clerics have access to. You can do that with ANY setting.

After thinking about it now a few minutes I'd actually change my vote to Greyhawk - but for no other reason than tradition.

 

[mhacdebhandia]

Don't quite see the point of continually threadcrapping by just objecting to other people's choices, but maybe that's just me.

 

[Nightfall]

You talking to me Mac?

I'm not objecting merely stating I disagree with it. Not very vehemently I'd say but there you are...

If not me...eh.