Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
WotC setting search winner - Eberron
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Aitch Eye" data-source="post: 1030814" data-attributes="member: 385"><p>Here are the guidelines WotC laid out:</p><p></p><p>"Wizards of the Coast, Inc. is searching for proposals for a new fantasy setting (“Fantasy Setting Search”). Such a setting may serve as a vehicle for novels, roleplaying games, card games, miniatures, and other entertainment products. In scope and flavor, your proposed fantasy setting should be similar to our existing settings, particularly Forgotten Realms and Dragonlance."</p><p></p><p>If a lawyer would take a case based on that, I suspect the primary consideration would be whether the client was paying up front. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></p><p></p><p>I seem to remember Valterra making some comments directly addressing the issue of similarity to FR and Dragonlance, but the news page archives don't go back that far, and I can't find it at GamingReport. Perhaps someone here has them on file? As I remember it, he indicated that it was more that you'd have a tougher time making it if you went beyond the baselines of standard D&D rather than it being completely banned. My memory could very well be faulty, though, so I'd like to see the quotes again.</p><p></p><p>However, from what little we've seen -- particularly taking Gargoyle's comments into consideration -- this setting could well be within the vague guidelines given in the original press release.</p><p></p><p>There'll be a "first glimpse" of the setting in the next <em>Dragon</em>, though they didn't give any info on what they mean by that.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I've been trying to formulate some more general comments, but I haven't figured out a way of doing it in any detail that wouldn't tend to make the arguments more personal than I like to get. So I'll just say that from the very tiny bit we've seen, it could well be interesting, and given that so-called standard D&D already has FR and Dragonlance lines being published, I think it's perfectly reasonable and possibly wiser (in principle, anyway) for Wizards to do something somewhat different...if it actually is really all that different. I don't think there's enough detail or certainty in the Gaming Report article to give an idea of the big picture, or to even remotely justify some of the assumptions being made about it, or the level of the negative reaction people are showing towards it.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Aitch Eye, post: 1030814, member: 385"] Here are the guidelines WotC laid out: "Wizards of the Coast, Inc. is searching for proposals for a new fantasy setting (“Fantasy Setting Search”). Such a setting may serve as a vehicle for novels, roleplaying games, card games, miniatures, and other entertainment products. In scope and flavor, your proposed fantasy setting should be similar to our existing settings, particularly Forgotten Realms and Dragonlance." If a lawyer would take a case based on that, I suspect the primary consideration would be whether the client was paying up front. :) I seem to remember Valterra making some comments directly addressing the issue of similarity to FR and Dragonlance, but the news page archives don't go back that far, and I can't find it at GamingReport. Perhaps someone here has them on file? As I remember it, he indicated that it was more that you'd have a tougher time making it if you went beyond the baselines of standard D&D rather than it being completely banned. My memory could very well be faulty, though, so I'd like to see the quotes again. However, from what little we've seen -- particularly taking Gargoyle's comments into consideration -- this setting could well be within the vague guidelines given in the original press release. There'll be a "first glimpse" of the setting in the next [i]Dragon[/i], though they didn't give any info on what they mean by that. I've been trying to formulate some more general comments, but I haven't figured out a way of doing it in any detail that wouldn't tend to make the arguments more personal than I like to get. So I'll just say that from the very tiny bit we've seen, it could well be interesting, and given that so-called standard D&D already has FR and Dragonlance lines being published, I think it's perfectly reasonable and possibly wiser (in principle, anyway) for Wizards to do something somewhat different...if it actually is really all that different. I don't think there's enough detail or certainty in the Gaming Report article to give an idea of the big picture, or to even remotely justify some of the assumptions being made about it, or the level of the negative reaction people are showing towards it. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
WotC setting search winner - Eberron
Top