D&D (2024) Greyhawk Confirmed. Tell Me Why.

[Von Ether]

Some nod to creativity and not just profit would be nice.

That's the rub, though, a "nod" and "creativity" can be highly subjective. And how far back does one establish this criteria?

So far 5e has done lots of creative stuff that's been mentioned above. Some people might love the idea of a body horror biotech "necromaner" is the bee's knees but not be impressed with turning hell into a Mad Max homage.

And despite its other flaws, some fans may not like Spelljammer plot of stopping a massive sun-powered doomsday device because they don't like the setting in the first place, or if they are big sci-fi fans, feel like they have seen this before despite it being in a fantasy D&D setting.

 

[CapnZapp]

Why? We have plenty of creatively daring companies and people in the industry. And honestly, many of those companies are not great at other things our industry needs more of. (Now a days, the phrase, "For gamers, from gamers." is a red flag for me.

The more interesting argument would be "how our hobby would benefit greatly from a company that sees itself as a steward of the hobby and industry:"

• As in not laying off employees at Xmas ...
• Better yet provide a career path that sustains average employee until retirement and not just a rare few
• Fighting the current trend thinking making "only" a profit is bad vs constant, unstainable grow as the only goal.
• More 3PP partnerships vs walled garden

You get the idea.

No, I don't think I do.

As I read you, you're arguing for WotC to stop with their Christmas layoffs and more, but you're completely fine with them releasing only the widest safest most vanilla products imaginable?

I know that I would put "release actually intriguing campaign worlds" on that list of yours, and it wouldn't come last either.

 

[Von Ether]

No, I don't think I do.

As I read you, you're arguing for WotC to stop with their Christmas layoffs and more, but you're completely fine with them releasing only the widest safest most vanilla products imaginable?

Because, sadly, vanilla is where the money is, so I don't see that as paradox.

The vast majority of D&D customers want "same but different." The more imaginative you get, the smaller your audience, which is a space where "release actually intriguing campaign worlds" should be on the top of every 3PP's request list.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

So I saw this thread had 1,853 replies, and I was like, YAY GREYHAWK!

And then I read the last few pages ...

Uh, so, Greyhawk. It's a cool setting. Good to see it.

 

[Chaosmancer]

No, I don't think I do.

As I read you, you're arguing for WotC to stop with their Christmas layoffs and more, but you're completely fine with them releasing only the widest safest most vanilla products imaginable?

I know that I would put "release actually intriguing campaign worlds" on that list of yours, and it wouldn't come last either.

If Greyhawk is "the widest, safest, most vanilla product imaginable" then what was the Rick and Morty setting book they released a few years ago? Vecna: Eve of Ruin is probably a very safe bet in terms of plots... but I can't actually think of a set of adventures for DnD like Golden Vault, where you are largely DISCOURAGED from combat.

But, I get it, it is easier to say "actually intriguing" than "that I like" when looking at the sheer number of officially supported settings for 5e. Easier to say that WoTC has never done anything beyond the normal DnD fair, than to say that they did, and it didn't sell well or get accepted by the community.

 

[pemerton]

I would expect a "how to" in the DMG to be pretty plain, within the basic conceits of D&D fiction. The sample dungeon (ruined monastery) in Gygax's DMG, the Haunted Keep in Moldvay Basic, and the Grand Duchy in Cook/Marsh Expert are all pretty plain. They illustrate the basics of mapping and keying a dungeon, drawing a campaign and wilderness map with a few key elements on it, etc.

As far as creative daring in RPG design is concerned, WotC tried that. There's generally at least one active thread on these boards explaining how that was not the commercial success the company hoped for. So now they're doing something that will make them more money!

 

[Parmandur]

I would expect a "how to" in the DMG to be pretty plain, within the basic conceits of D&D fiction. The sample dungeon (ruined monastery) in Gygax's DMG, the Haunted Keep in Moldvay Basic, and the Grand Duchy in Cook/Marsh Expert are all pretty plain. They illustrate the basics of mapping and keying a dungeon, drawing a campaign and wilderness map with a few key elements on it, etc.

As far as creative daring in RPG design is concerned, WotC tried that. There's generally at least one active thread on these boards explaining how that was not the commercial success the company hoped for. So now they're doing something that will make them more money!

And they do go outside the box still, as with the Deck of Many Things or Radiant Citadel.

But less so in the DMG.

 

[Hussar]

What I don’t understand is why people would expect WotC to change things up.

Year after year of record growth. The kind of growth that the hobby has never seen. Sustained growth for the better part of a decade.

What incentive is there to change what they are doing?

The times when we saw DnD being experimental were always when the company was failing.

I’m happy that they are not changing things up. That means that things are going well.

I remember when Christmas layoffs were an annual event. When lasting more than two years at WotC was a major achievement.

I really don’t want to go back to those days.

 

[Remathilis]

IAs far as creative daring in RPG design is concerned, WotC tried that. There's generally at least one active thread on these boards explaining how that was not the commercial success the company hoped for. So now they're doing something that will make them more money!

There is a fine line between "trying new things" and "doing what you do best." Nobody really pines for the McPizza, they go to Mickey D's for hamburgers and fries. Why would people want McDonald's to sell pizza or tacos or something they're not known for? Especially when those markets are well served by others.

 

[pemerton]

There is a fine line between "trying new things" and "doing what you do best." Nobody really pines for the McPizza, they go to Mickey D's for hamburgers and fries. Why would people want McDonald's to sell pizza or tacos or something they're not known for? Especially when those markets are well served by others.

Well, when WotC was publishing 4e D&D I bought a lot of the stuff they were offering. It's more than 10 years now since I've bought something from WotC (as best I recall, and based on a quick scan through my online purchase email folder).

I'm happy to accept that I'm in a minority.