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

[...m...]

I don’t think it is a setting, it’s the stuff that connects different settings, so you can go from one to the other. As the KS said

‘The Labyrinth Worldbook provides something new in 5E tabletop, a campaign overlay. It is a means to connect together as many existing campaign settings as you desire by adding the Labyrinth as a connecting layer and source of adventure.’

...it's lying open on my table right now and i can assure you that it's very much a campaign setting despite also serving as an overlay; in fact it readily supports either playstyle or both...while the lore is more distilled than i'd've preferred on account of player-facing mechanics squeezed into the same sourcebook, its gazetteer runs about one hundred pages of labyrinth-specific locations and factions, plus another sixty pages of labyrinth-specific cosmology, pantheons, gamemaster-facing mechanics, and adventure seeds...

...i was disappointed that the labyrinth worldbook doesn't enjoy the same verbosity of the midgard worldbook, but it's still cut from the same template...

(from the tales of the valiant kickstarter: )

The 74-page Guide to the Labyrinth shares a first look at the Labyrinth setting by Wolfgang Baur and features dozens of campaign worlds written by backers from the Open Call. This is the default setting for the Tales of the Valiant system and is highly compatible with home campaigns worldwide.

 

[Parmandur]

I think you are coming at it from a specific point that undervalued how previous editions defined and informed things. You don't think how mechanics and settings interact matters because from your point of view, it kind of did not. But in reality it very much did.

I think it continues to matter because I think how fiction and game play interact is very important, but I can see how others (especially those "raised" on 5e) might think differently.

But still, I think it is important and valuable and fun and i think imagining a setting embracing 5.5E is a worthwhile endeavor-- certainly more worthwhile than arguing the very premise.

It is interesting how they interact, but always mechani s are at the service of a story, the Setting is what inform the use of mechanics, even in the oddball case of Eberron's conception.

 

[bedir than]

So just by way of example, one mechanical thing that is new in 5.5 that I think would impact the way we write D&D settings differently than how we have done it so far, is the change in how species and background interact mechanically. previously, we did a lot of pastiche Tolkiening -- this race (or subrace) is like this and lives here and so on. 5.5 throws that out in a big way. Those themed locations (your Rivendels and whatever) would no longer be species based, but culturally based. that is a big deal in a setting design.

But those mechanics are for heroes, not the normies.
That's part of the 5e premise. The setting you're suggesting ignores one of the foundational elements of the rule set.

 

[Azzy]

Personally, I'm not against it, but I don't really see much of a point in doing so. It would have to really bring something new to the table that existing settings or homebrew don't in order to be interesting to the player base. Otherwise, why bother?

 

[Reynard]

But those mechanics are for heroes, not the normies.
That's part of the 5e premise. The setting you're suggesting ignores one of the foundational elements of the rule set.

Ok. So?

 

[Parmandur]

But they aren't new.

ETA: specifically, they aren't designed with 5E as a root; the root is MtG. They are being shoeshorned into 5E no less than other older settings.

Just to go back to this bit. When James Wyatt got the opportunity to actually make Ravnica into a Magic book, the Magic worldbuilding team had made a very popular and exciting high con episode Setting with some interesting details. But they did not consider the sorts of worldbuilding questions that are necessary for day-to-day life like "where do people sleep and eat". So Wyatt had to answer those sorts of questions and build out a lot. And as the primary author of both the 2014 and 2024 DMG, I would say that Ravnica is about as close to the design of 5E's design philosophies being enacted in a Setting.

 

[Twiggly the Gnome]

But those mechanics are for heroes, not the normies.
That's part of the 5e premise. The setting you're suggesting ignores one of the foundational elements of the rule set.

I wouldn't want Wizard's to do it, but a setting based on min-maxer absurdities like every Monk being a sailor might be fun.

 

[zakael19]

@Reynard you asked about Exandria, there was a thread about that recently. I think it's the most 5e / current play culture WOTC official setting to come out, and the Wildemount book in particular is actually quite good. My specific bulletized list walking through some strong points is here.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

I would like to have a new setting but I don’t think it’s needed.

 

[CreamCloud0]

But those mechanics are for heroes, not the normies.
That's part of the 5e premise. The setting you're suggesting ignores one of the foundational elements of the rule set.

Is it ever actually stated anywhere those things ‘aren’t for the normies’ or is that something you want to assume because most GMs simply don’t remember/care to give their NPCs those things? honestly I think that would be a good concept to play up on in a ‘designed for 5e’ setting, that a dragonborn guard comes with elemental breath, temporary flight, athletics + perception proficiency and the alert feat (plus I’d assume proficiency with all the equipment that comes in their background)