-
Monstrous Menagerie II: Hordes & Heroes has a launch date! Mark your calendars for November 12th, 2024. 300+ more monsters for your D&D 2024, or Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition games, plus new horde rules and rules for heroic monsters who level up alongside you--whether they be allies, companions, or foes! Click here to follow on Kickstarter!
D&D 5E restart or rewrite or new?
- Thread starter GMforPowergamers
- Start date
GMforPowergamers
Legend
for those old ones though do you want them reset to original (like 4e darksun) reimagine rest (like curse of strahd) or continued (like forgotten realms)?
Of those I’m only familiar with Strahd, and that approach seemed fine to me.
Mercurius
Legend
It really depends upon the setting, but as a general rule:
Classic settings: I generally find that the first versions were generally the best, perhaps because they sprung directly from the mind of the creator and were strongly representative of the uniqueness of their imagination. It is not that I didn't like, say, post gray box Realms, but it became something other than Greenwood's Realms - which had a very Greenwoodian flavor.
New settings: Something different. Not simply, "OK, let's do something other than Europe" - because then we get just endless Earth analogues. I'd like to see different approaches all together, which is one of the reasons I like the Magic settings: there's a lot of diversity there, and it isn't only tied to Earth analogues.
But more importantly, I think settings are exactly where you can play with the idea that D&D is different in every world, setting, and table. Not everything in the core rulebooks needs to be shoe-horned into a setting, especially when it doesn't fit thematically. In other words, the rules and lore of D&D as a whole is a toolbox to draw from, but not every project (setting) needs every tool. I dislike the idea that every setting has to follow the same core ethos, or include every element of the rules and lore.
Classic settings: I generally find that the first versions were generally the best, perhaps because they sprung directly from the mind of the creator and were strongly representative of the uniqueness of their imagination. It is not that I didn't like, say, post gray box Realms, but it became something other than Greenwood's Realms - which had a very Greenwoodian flavor.
New settings: Something different. Not simply, "OK, let's do something other than Europe" - because then we get just endless Earth analogues. I'd like to see different approaches all together, which is one of the reasons I like the Magic settings: there's a lot of diversity there, and it isn't only tied to Earth analogues.
But more importantly, I think settings are exactly where you can play with the idea that D&D is different in every world, setting, and table. Not everything in the core rulebooks needs to be shoe-horned into a setting, especially when it doesn't fit thematically. In other words, the rules and lore of D&D as a whole is a toolbox to draw from, but not every project (setting) needs every tool. I dislike the idea that every setting has to follow the same core ethos, or include every element of the rules and lore.
I will profess ignorance, but isn't that what the Wildemount setting is supposed to be?
LordEntrails
Hero
New.
I've never understood resetting or re-publishing existing settings. Or I should say, the only way that makes sense to me is to go forward in time and do a new part of the timeline. Everything published before is what it is, no need to republish it and just change the few mechanics that have changed in the edition since it was published. IMO, they can all be used as is, no need to republish anything that already exists.
I've never understood resetting or re-publishing existing settings. Or I should say, the only way that makes sense to me is to go forward in time and do a new part of the timeline. Everything published before is what it is, no need to republish it and just change the few mechanics that have changed in the edition since it was published. IMO, they can all be used as is, no need to republish anything that already exists.
I would like to see them continue the existing setting largely in the spirit of the originals, even if they don't feel compelled to do exact re-creations.
First, WotC has talked about the continuity of the D&D experience. They have re-released classic adventures in TftYP and GoS in part because it is cool that the middle school kids picking up D&D for the first time in 2022 can play the same adventures as kids back in the '70s and 80s. Re-releasing the old campaign settings would serve that goal in a way that re-imagining the settings or churning out new material wouldn't.
Second, these campaign settings have a built in fanbase that is invested in them. Yeah I can get a decent quality PDF of DMs Guild, but that is not the same as getting a shiny new hardback (or slipcase) with modern production values for my shelf. So re-release the settings people already care about, in a way that is true to the originals, will get more milage that doing a re-imagining or trying to innovate.
Third, WotC has a monopoly on the old settings. There are a ton of 3PP that are making cool and innovative campaign settings for 5E, but no one else can do anything with the existing IP. So let the 3PP throw the wild ideas against the wall and see which ones stick, and let WotC build on the foundation they have built over the decades.
Finally, I just don't see anything that makes me think modern WotC is going to be great at reimagining or designing new settings. The only good "original" 5E setting WotC has done was licensed from Matt Mercer. Their other stuff has been conversions of M:tG settings. There is just no reason to think they are going to do a better job of creating a compelling new setting than the 3PP who are doing original 5E settings already. That's not to crap on WotC, but I think their superpower is having all of the existing IP to build on, rather than that they are the most creative or innovative RPG company out there.
First, WotC has talked about the continuity of the D&D experience. They have re-released classic adventures in TftYP and GoS in part because it is cool that the middle school kids picking up D&D for the first time in 2022 can play the same adventures as kids back in the '70s and 80s. Re-releasing the old campaign settings would serve that goal in a way that re-imagining the settings or churning out new material wouldn't.
Second, these campaign settings have a built in fanbase that is invested in them. Yeah I can get a decent quality PDF of DMs Guild, but that is not the same as getting a shiny new hardback (or slipcase) with modern production values for my shelf. So re-release the settings people already care about, in a way that is true to the originals, will get more milage that doing a re-imagining or trying to innovate.
Third, WotC has a monopoly on the old settings. There are a ton of 3PP that are making cool and innovative campaign settings for 5E, but no one else can do anything with the existing IP. So let the 3PP throw the wild ideas against the wall and see which ones stick, and let WotC build on the foundation they have built over the decades.
Finally, I just don't see anything that makes me think modern WotC is going to be great at reimagining or designing new settings. The only good "original" 5E setting WotC has done was licensed from Matt Mercer. Their other stuff has been conversions of M:tG settings. There is just no reason to think they are going to do a better job of creating a compelling new setting than the 3PP who are doing original 5E settings already. That's not to crap on WotC, but I think their superpower is having all of the existing IP to build on, rather than that they are the most creative or innovative RPG company out there.
Similar Threads
