D&D 5E (2024) WotC Should Make 5.5E Specific Setting


log in or register to remove this ad




You don't need to change it at all with a new edition. Revealing what was always there because of a new addition is not a change to the setting. A change would be if a race was known to be there and it vanished because of a new edition.

For example, when Dragonborn came out and were revealed for the Forgotten Realms, they didn't need to crash another planet into Toril for them to be there. They could just have just have new products have them present as if they were always there and there would have been no issue. However, because dragons and dragon blood is so powerful, Dragonborn in my game are around CR 5 right out of the gate without any class abilities placed on top, so they are not usable as a PC race. That is a change to the setting for my game as a known race is not the same as it was.
There were a lot of really WTF were they smoking decisions made about 4e Forgotten Realms that drove the point home that blowing up the setting every time a new edition comes out is a very very bad idea.
 

There were a lot of really WTF were they smoking decisions made about 4e Forgotten Realms that drove the point home that blowing up the setting every time a new edition comes out is a very very bad idea.
Yeah. My Forgotten Realms never had a Sundering or Spell Plague. Yet it still has all the stuff in each edition and I have had no issues with that at all, despite not going out of my way to explain any of it.
 

oh, sure, they dangle the nostalgia carrot, but if during design they have to choose between finding a new audience or catering to one from 30 years ago, they have to go with the new one
I just don't think that's a decision that will ever have to be made. We humans just don't change that quickly. They can go for both demographics today, and in 30 years when the current batch is the 30 year old group, they can go for both groups then as well.
 

And the designers were influenced by the untold millions of D&D fans who wanted certain things from past editions kept in the new edition. Which is probably one reason (out of many) for why certain things are the same in almost every D&D edition.
I actually think the reverse is true. Setting is not defined by the mechanics. If it was, then Greyhawk would only be usable with the 1e rules since it would be defined by those mechanics.

Instead setting defines the mechanics. Let's take elf. In the Greyhawk setting defined elf as +1 dex, -1 con, infravision, 90% resistant to sleep and charm spells, +1 to hit with bows and short/long swords, etc. In 3e Greyhawk defined elf as +2 dex, -2 con, low light vision, extra weapon proficiencies, +2 to listen/spot/search, complete immunity to sleep effects, but only a +2 save vs. charm, and secret door spotting. In 5e Greyhawk defines elf as +2 dex, darkvision, perception proficiency, advantage on charm saves and immunity to sleep, and trance.
 


What about the reverse? The setting defining the mechanics. Dark Sun, Planescape and Eberron have it where magic operates a tad differently than it does in the Forgotten Realms.
There are some setting specific mechanics, but those aren't from the default rules. With the exception of maybe Planescape, since those exceptions are planar effects. Of course those effects are still present even if not playing Planescape, so those aren't really setting specific. What about Eberron works differently with regard to magic?
 

Remove ads

Top