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

[Scribe]

Well, Wildemont got an AP (Netherdeep) and Darrington Press released a large amount of 3pp support. If any setting had a chance, it was that one. But you kinda supported my point; so far only Faerun, Eberron and Ravenloft got any sort of ongoing support. SJ, PS, DL, and GH all have token support so far (and we don't know what format DS will take).

I don't consider 3PP settings here.

It needs to be Wizards, with a real push, multiple adventures, source books, and marketing.

Otherwise, no way it will spread to the wider more disconnected (offline) player base.

 

[Parmandur]

You seem overly focused on this. Do you think Eberron was without theme or story?

Not at all, it is the themes and story that make ot work. That is why there is no tension running it on 4E or 5E, or in GURPS or Savage Worlds if desired. The "Everything in 3E is Here" wasn't what made it work.

That is just silly.

Not in the slightest, that is dead earnest: TSR pumped out settings for D&D, and there are in excess of 100 named Planes for Magic. Name a story theme, WotC already owns IP that can fit the bill. Hence all the Magic Settings once they crossed that threshold.

Of those, only Radiant Citadel was created for 5E, and it is hardly a complete setting. Exandria was made for 4E and/or Pathfinder, and the rest are MtG settings.

What is "complete"? Why doesn't a Magic Setting count? Examdria was first published as 5E. Does the Forgotten Realma or Greyhawk not count as AD&D settings, because both predates it?

But we have been over this in this thread already, and there doesn't seem to be a lot more to say on the subject.

I dunno, the most interesting question remains to me the very premise of the thread.

 

[Parmandur]

I think what it comes down to is what we are calling the system. You can take the base mechanics of 5.x (d20 vs TN, advantage/disadvantage, proficiency bonus, etc) and build all sorts of games with it it. One Ring and Doctors & Daleks proves that. But you can't take the 5e Players Handbook and say "we're going to play Harry Potter or Game of Thrones with this". Your still going to get halflings and paladins and Vancian magic. Not you can take that PHB, strip out the magic system and replace the classes and species and add gritty resting or modernistic skills to the game, but your no longer playing Dungeons and Dragons , your playing a 5e compatible d20 game.

Which is why I say D&D is really only good at modeling D&D (in a variety of flavors), because the Core Rulebooks have never been about building different types of fantasy RPGs, just tweaking the core expectations a little. You need to utterly rebuild the system to do anything other than play D&D with horror/pulp/s&s/in space influences.

I think you are partially right, yet people use it that way: and 5E bends rather than breaks.

 

[Parmandur]

How much do you think that moved the needle in terms of fandom reaction? In terms of sales? I might be out of the loop, but I don't think any of them made as big a splash as Eberron did in 2003.

As of February 2019, Guildmasters Guide to Ravnica was the fastest selling product in the entire 45 year history of Dungeons & Dragons. Tashasurpassed it, and eventually the 2024 Core books...bjt the Magic Settigns have been very well received by Magic fans and grown D&D.

 

[Remathilis]

I don't consider 3PP settings here.

It needs to be Wizards, with a real push, multiple adventures, source books, and marketing.

Otherwise, no way it will spread to the wider more disconnected (offline) player base.

The only setting that meets that criteria is Forgotten Realms. Eberron had two books and two Adventure League paths, and Ravenloft had an adventure, a book, and a AL path. Still, it beats what every other setting so far has gotten.

 

[Yaarel]

As of February 2019, Guildmasters Guide to Ravnica was the fastest selling product in the entire 45 year history of Dungeons & Dragons. Tashasurpassed it, and eventually the 2024 Core books...bjt the Magic Settigns have been very well received by Magic fans and grown D&D.

I am glad. I dont play the card game but I enjoy these Magic The Gathering settings for D&D.

 

[Scribe]

Eberron had two books and two Adventure League paths

When it was released? I dont mean for 5e.

 

[Remathilis]

When it was released? I dont mean for 5e.

I was just pointing out how much someone who started in 5e would have setting support without relying on converting or wikis.

 

[Scribe]

I was just pointing out how much someone who started in 5e would have setting support without relying on converting or wikis.

Right, but that's my point.

Wizards is coasting on past glory. They haven't even tried to launch and support a new setting for a decade.

 

[Remathilis]

Right, but that's my point.

Wizards is coasting on past glory. They haven't even tried to launch and support a new setting for a decade.

That's why they call it Wizards of the Coast!

Then again, I get the notion we're never going to see a setting detailed as deeply as the old "separate line" era. Eberron was essentially the end of that style of setting coverage. I actually don't think I would want the old era of multiple lines with sourcebooks per setting, but I think I do want more than one. (Esp for the the hybrid module/sourcebook settings of DL PS, and SJ).

EDIT: I think you only get that old style coverage again if one settings is declared THE D&D setting and it's lore can be incorporated into supplements and adventures without adding additional books to the lineup.