Should Wizards do a total setting reboot?

There's been quite a bit of talk by folks about bringing back this setting or that setting, but quite frankly, the D&D setting are all very similar and generally only brought one or two new things to the game (Dark Sun = Psionics, Hollow World = a hollow world of dinosaurs, Council of Wyrms = playing dragons as PC's, etc.).  They share a lot of similar things otherwise (monsters, cosmology, mythos, etc.), so I'm starting to wonder why...?  Why have different settings at all?  I mean they already took Forgotten Realms and tacked Al-Qadim, Maztica and Kara-Tur onto a single planet, why not stack Hollow World in under that Underdark and slap the Dark Sun and Dragonlance continents on there somewhere too?  Ravenloft is just this world's Transylvania.  Then there's a secluded island with a spaceport for Spelljammer (not to mention the rest of the solar system) where the folks generally don't interact with the rest of the world for some reason and Planescape is pretty much already built into the D&D cosmos...

You get the idea.  All these various concepts can be crammed into a single, unified setting - the D&D setting with the release of D&D Next.  The basics of it can be built right into the core books.  Basically Wizard could release all the old setting material as low-cost pdf's for those that want the originals, but at the same time for D&D Next, probably onward, there would be only one setting, the D&D setting - it doesn't even need a name beyond that really.  So you have your PHB, DMG, MM and now a fourth "core" book - the setting book.  Of course, if you want more detail on continent A or B, there's a supplement book for that.  If you want more information on these spaceships, there's a supplement book for that as well.  If you want more info on the planes - supplement book - you get the idea.

Now they don't necessarily have to actually use all the previous settings/material in this new setting, I wouldn't if it were up to me, but I'd reuse the concepts of those settings so that yes you have tons of Planes of Existence and can travel through them, spelljammer spaceships in the solar system flying to different worlds, several different continents (and even different worlds with different continents as implied by the spelljammer comment) with slightly different feels/themes to give the impression and flavor of the old settings, Psionics from the start, an advanced steampunk (Eberron) planet in the setting, etc. etc.  They may even reuse some of the most well known names/places/things from those settings such as Waterdeep, Thri-kreen, Athas is one of the planets in the solar system, Faerun is another, etc.

Would you be on board with such a thing, or is that just going too far for you?
I'd be fine with that - but only because I wouldn't need the setting book in the first place. I'd make my own, regardless of how the official settings are packaged.

It's not that I necessarily dislike the settings. But personally I don't think of D&D as a setting specific game. I read D&D novels, but not to use them as game worlds.
Children believe what we tell them, they have complete faith in us. I ask of you a little of this childlike simplicity, and to bring us luck, let me speak four truly magic words: "A long time ago...." (Jean Cocteau's Beauty and the Beast) Winner of You Build the Character #12, YbtC #22, YbtC #24, YbtC #28 and YbtC #35 Winner of You Make the... Contest #8
Would you be on board with such a thing, or is that just going too far for you?


That's a bit too far for me.  Some settings may fit together enough to make that possible, but slapping everything on or in a single planet doesn't seem right to me.  Besides, people who want to combine two or more settings can already do that on their own if they wish to.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

Old Forgotten Realms supplements are inadequate for a new edition.  To play the Forgotten Realms setting with D&DN rules but in a time period contemporary to one of the older editions would violate canon.  Considering that the only respect I have for that ridiculously-high-magic setting is how it plays the arbitrary rules of whatever the current edition is absurdly straight, I don't think it would be fair to take that away from it.

I'm not saying anyone shouldn't feel free to do whatever they want in their home games, of course, but officially published resource material should be held to a slightly higher standard.  Unless they do something with time travel, of course.
 

The metagame is not the game.

I don't use the realms at all but I do have a home brew world that mixes everything (spell jammer style play is accessed in the astral plane).

I think that settings are great reference material but I don't use them because as DM I should know the world better than my players and I don't read the novels and have little interest in trying to memorize a world when I can talor my own instead.

Edition wars kill players,Dungeons and Dragons needs every player it can get.

I think that settings are great reference material but I don't use them because as DM I should know the world better than my players and I don't read the novels and have little interest in trying to memorize a world when I can talor my own instead.



One thing I really hate is when a player tries to tell me how to run my world. I don't use published settings. The last thing I want is some settting lawyer telling me that what I'm doing goes against lore.

Screw their lore I say!!

Theres a lot of things about published game worlds I like but I won't actually use one. I steal things from them all the time though.

For me, world building is half the fun, more than half actually.

I think that settings are great reference material but I don't use them because as DM I should know the world better than my players and I don't read the novels and have little interest in trying to memorize a world when I can talor my own instead.



One thing I really hate is when a player tries to tell me how to run my world. I don't use published settings. The last thing I want is some settting lawyer telling me that what I'm doing goes against lore.

Screw their lore I say!!

Theres a lot of things about published game worlds I like but I won't actually use one. I steal things from them all the time though.

For me, world building is half the fun, more than half actually.


+1


waits for someone to come in and post that they dont have time to make tehir own worlds anymore....
a mask everyone has at least two of, one they wear in public and another they wear in private.....
waits for someone to come in and post that they dont have time to make tehir own worlds anymore....


Like there's a better way to spend time than building worlds.

Well...okay.  Pandas and ferrets are more worth it.  After that...I'm kinna drawin' a blank here. Tongue Out

"Lightning...it flashes bright, then fades away.  It can't protect, it can only destroy."

waits for someone to come in and post that they dont have time to make tehir own worlds anymore....





:P

An undead spectre occasionally returning to remind the fandom of its grim existence.

 

 

Some good pointers for the fellow hobbyist!:

  • KEEP D&D ALIVE, END EDITION WARS!
  • RESPECT PEOPLES' PREFERENCES
  • JUST ENJOY THE GAME!
tell that to those that said that to me when I said that I hope that dnd5e aka dndnext does not have a core setting and should not mention deities or the city names in the racial back grounds.




to the OP.

WOTC already said that they felt that they had to respect to the work of the authors and would not reboot.


respect their work my ... they dont have to respect their work, all they have to do is pick up the phone and call them up and ask if they mind if this novel of theirs is dropped from canon lore or not.


they already got paid so...


but really they said no and should they do a reboot or restart?? No, they should fix their mess first and finish 5e's ruleset               
a mask everyone has at least two of, one they wear in public and another they wear in private.....
I really do not like the idea of cramming conceptually different settings into one setting. A setting is as much what it excludes as what it includes. Besides, stuff like world creation lore doesn't travel very well from setting to setting. Eberron's dragons and demons stuff doesn't work if its just a continent in some larger world.

I just don't see what benefit there is to be had from cramming everything into one outrageous setting. I like the approach they took with 4e: have a very basic generic setting (Nentir Vale and PoL), then other settings that simply revoke the core setting. I hope they keep PoL and Nentir Vale as their core setting because I actually do like the bits of flavor we have for it.
"So shall it be! Dear-bought those songs shall be be accounted, and yet shall be well-bought. For the price could be no other. Thus even as Eru spoke to us shall beauty not before conceived be brought into Eä, and evil yet be good to have been." - Manwë, High King of the Valar
@Authw8, yeah, I also hope they keep the Nentir Vale setting, or at least the cosmology and deities. They're a *huge* improvement over the Great Wheel and the Greyhawk gods, IMO.

Wounds Module [updated for Basic]

Proficiency Module

@Authw8, yeah, I also hope they keep the Nentir Vale setting, or at least the cosmology and deities. They're a *huge* improvement over the Great Wheel and the Greyhawk gods, IMO.


Yeah, I didn't even want to get into the cosmology, but I never really liked the Great Wheel stuff, and 4e's cosmology is pretty solid. A lot of people would be upset about this though, just for pure nostalgia reasons, so I doubt they'll keep the 4e cosmology.
"So shall it be! Dear-bought those songs shall be be accounted, and yet shall be well-bought. For the price could be no other. Thus even as Eru spoke to us shall beauty not before conceived be brought into Eä, and evil yet be good to have been." - Manwë, High King of the Valar
@Authw8, yeah, I also hope they keep the Nentir Vale setting, or at least the cosmology and deities. They're a *huge* improvement over the Great Wheel and the Greyhawk gods, IMO.


Yeah, I didn't even want to get into the cosmology, but I never really liked the Great Wheel stuff, and 4e's cosmology is pretty solid. A lot of people would be upset about this though, just for pure nostalgia reasons, so I doubt they'll keep the 4e cosmology.



By all means, keep the POL content in existence, but seeing the POL/Core concepts in every aspect of D&D was a huge turn off for me.  So, as an independent concept, I want it to evolve...  But, I don't want it shoehorned into other parts of the game like before.

Now, on topic, I don't really want D&D to become an insane patchwork planet either.  That's what I have my homebrew world for (Though, I took the patchwork aspect from the Ravenloft CS)

An undead spectre occasionally returning to remind the fandom of its grim existence.

 

 

Some good pointers for the fellow hobbyist!:

  • KEEP D&D ALIVE, END EDITION WARS!
  • RESPECT PEOPLES' PREFERENCES
  • JUST ENJOY THE GAME!
@Authw8, yeah, I also hope they keep the Nentir Vale setting, or at least the cosmology and deities. They're a *huge* improvement over the Great Wheel and the Greyhawk gods, IMO.


Yeah, I didn't even want to get into the cosmology, but I never really liked the Great Wheel stuff, and 4e's cosmology is pretty solid. A lot of people would be upset about this though, just for pure nostalgia reasons, so I doubt they'll keep the 4e cosmology.



By all means, keep the POL content in existence, but seeing the POL/Core concepts in every aspect of D&D was a huge turn off for me.  So, as an independent concept, I want it to evolve...  But, I don't want it shoehorned into other parts of the game like before.


I don't really know what you mean by the concepts being in every aspect. In player books it was only very lightly present as I recall. If you used the CB then it basically just didn't exist. The DM books had it a little more I guess, but that's so easy to ignore I'm not sure what the issue is. I'm not necessarily trying to refute your opinion though, I'm just wondering where you felt it was "shoehorned" in?
"So shall it be! Dear-bought those songs shall be be accounted, and yet shall be well-bought. For the price could be no other. Thus even as Eru spoke to us shall beauty not before conceived be brought into Eä, and evil yet be good to have been." - Manwë, High King of the Valar
@Authw8, yeah, I also hope they keep the Nentir Vale setting, or at least the cosmology and deities. They're a *huge* improvement over the Great Wheel and the Greyhawk gods, IMO.


Yeah, I didn't even want to get into the cosmology, but I never really liked the Great Wheel stuff, and 4e's cosmology is pretty solid. A lot of people would be upset about this though, just for pure nostalgia reasons, so I doubt they'll keep the 4e cosmology.



By all means, keep the POL content in existence, but seeing the POL/Core concepts in every aspect of D&D was a huge turn off for me.  So, as an independent concept, I want it to evolve...  But, I don't want it shoehorned into other parts of the game like before.


I don't really know what you mean by the concepts being in every aspect. In player books it was only very lightly present as I recall. If you used the CB then it basically just didn't exist. The DM books had it a little more I guess, but that's so easy to ignore I'm not sure what the issue is. I'm not necessarily trying to refute your opinion though, I'm just wondering where you felt it was "shoehorned" in?



To clarify, I mean I wasn't fond of PoL world tropes, aspects, and content being shoved into other settings as justified as "core".  I respect the ideal that it was rolling with (Never invalidate the core set), but I'm not big on the dragonborn vs. tiefling kingdoms concept popping up in other spots or Returned Abeir and the Realms becoming a PoL-esque world, plus the PoL races (dragonborn, eladrin, *reskinned* tieflings, etc) suddenly showing up in Realms, Dark Sun, etc...  Perhaps PoL/Dawn War vs. Primodrials/The vale should become an independent entity to grow by itself and stand as a world assister.  A lot of it comes from bad DM experiences that had some clashes with the players that didn't mesh with me.  They didn't know/care about the previous concepts I liked and wanted to delve into, as well as they enjoyed the PoL concepts while I simply didn't and was confused by the more than slight retroactive continuity they proposed.  After all, DMing should be fun for me too, not a chore.  But, this is all YMMV here. 

An undead spectre occasionally returning to remind the fandom of its grim existence.

 

 

Some good pointers for the fellow hobbyist!:

  • KEEP D&D ALIVE, END EDITION WARS!
  • RESPECT PEOPLES' PREFERENCES
  • JUST ENJOY THE GAME!
To be fair, i don't mind a complete reboot of everything:  mechanics, settings, lore, etc...
@DrNecrotic, I agree that trying to mold the fluff of the Realms to match PoL concepts was a bad move, but remember that, just before it happened, there were vocal complaints about the Realms being impenetrable to new players or DMs. Applying PoL to the Realms was a botched attempt at addressing this that conveniently brought FR into line with the newest edition.

I don't advocate repeating this. I only advocate keeping the 4e pantheon and cosmology instead of reverting back to the Greyhawk gods (seriously, 'Boccob' sounds like the noise a chicken makes) and the Great Wheel (and the great software retailer in the sky, Bytopia!). Maybe poach some more of Greyhawk's better elements, but please leave most of it out of the initial PHB/DMG.

Wounds Module [updated for Basic]

Proficiency Module


  1. I don't want the core rulebooks to be tied to any one setting. Gods should be examples drawn from RW mythology or something.

  2. I want to see a reasonable, but not suicidal, range of setting supported overall. There is no reason why both PoL and Greyhawk shouldn't be given house room.

  3. I'd rather see a version of FR promoted in which, one way or another, my large volume of material from the Time of Troubles to the beginning of 3e is not rendered obsolete. Selfish, I know. If they can find a way of satisfying the Spellplague-era players as well, fine and good.

  4. I absolutely do not want to see a mish-mash of all settings in one world, as proposed by the OP.


Z.


  1. I don't want the core rulebooks to be tied to any one setting. Gods should be examples drawn from RW mythology or something.

  2. I want to see a reasonable, but not suicidal, range of setting supported overall. There is no reason why both PoL and Greyhawk shouldn't be given house room.

  3. I'd rather see a version of FR promoted in which, one way or another, my large volume of material from the Time of Troubles to the beginning of 3e is not rendered obsolete. Selfish, I know. If they can find a way of satisfying the Spellplague-era players as well, fine and good.

  4. I absolutely do not want to see a mish-mash of all settings in one world, as proposed by the OP.


Z.




These.

I'd like the core rules to remain generic and untied to any setting. Keep any specific gods out of the rulebooks. I also want each setting to remain separate.

Furthermore, I'd like to see an officially supported Hyborian setting. 
D&D Next - Basic and Expert Editions

I firmly believe that there should be two editions of the game; the core rules released as a "Basic" set and a more complicated expanded rules edition released as an "Expert" set. These two editions would provide separate entry points to the game; one for new players or players that want a more classic D&D game and another entry point for experienced gamers that want more options and all the other things they have come to expect from previous editions.

Also, they must release several rules modules covering the main elements of the game (i.e., classes, races, combat, magic, monsters, etc.) upon launch to further expand the game for those that still need more complexity in a particular element of the game.


Here's a mockup of the Basic Set I created.



(CLICK HERE TO VIEW LARGER IMAGE)
  

Basic Set

This boxed set contains a simple, "bare bones" edition of the game; the core rules. It's for those that want a rules-light edition of the game that is extremely modifiable or for new players that get intimidated easily by too many rules and/or options. The Basic Set contains everything needed to play with all the "classic" D&D races (i.e., Human, Dwarf, Elf, and Halfling) and classes (i.e., Cleric, Fighter, Rogue, Wizard) all the way up to maximum level (i.e., 20th Level).

The Basic boxed set contains:

Quick Start Rules
A "choose your own way" adventure intended as an intro to RPGs and basic D&D terms.

Player's Handbook
(Softcover, 125 pages)
Features rules for playing the classic D&D races and classes all the way up to 20th level.

Dungeon Master's Guide

(Softcover, 125 pages)
Includes the basic rules for dungeon masters.

Monster Manual
(Softcover, 100 pages)
Includes all the classic iconic monsters from D&D. 

Introductory Adventure
(Keep on the Borderlands)
An introductory adventure for beginning players and DMs.

Also includes: 

Character Sheets
Reference Sheets
Set of Dice


Expert Set

A set of hardbound rules that contains the core rules plus expanded races and classes, more spells and a large selection of optional rules modules — that is, pretty much everything that experienced players have come to expect. Each expert edition manual may be purchased separately, or in a boxed set. The Expert set includes:

Expert PHB (Hardcover, 225 pages. $35 Includes core rules plus 10 playable races, 10 character classes, expanded selection of spells and rules modules for players.)
Expert DMG (Hardcover, 250 pages. $35 Includes core rules plus expanded rules modules for DMs.)
Expert MM (Hardcover, 225 pages. $35 Includes an expanded list of monsters and creatures to challenge characters)


Expansions

These expansion rules modules can be used with both the Basic and Expert sets. Each expansion covers one specific aspect of the game, such as character creation, combat, spells, monsters, etc.) 

Hall of Heroes (Hardcover, 225 pages. $35 Includes a vast selection of playable character races and classes, new and old all in one book)
Combat and Tactics (Hardcover, 225 pages. $35 Includes dozens of new and old optional rules for combat all in one book)
Creature Compendium (Hardcover, 350 pages.$35 Includes hundreds of monsters, new and old all in one book)
The Grimoire (Hardcover, 225 pages. $35 Includes hundreds of new and old spells all in one book)





A Million Hit Points of Light: Shedding Light on Damage

A Million Hit Points of Light: Shedding Light on Damage and Hit Points

In my personal campaigns, I use the following system for damage and dying. It's a slight modification of the long-standing principles etsablished by the D&D game, only with a new definition of what 0 or less hit points means. I've been using it for years because it works really well. However, I've made some adjustments to take advantage of the D&D Next rules. I've decided to present the first part in a Q&A format for better clarity. So let's begin...

What are hit points?
The premise is very simple, but often misunderstood; hit points are an abstraction that represent the character's ability to avoid serious damage, not necessarily their ability to take serious damage. This is a very important distinction. They represent a combination of skillful maneuvering, toughness, stamina and luck. Some targets have more hit points because they are physically tougher and are harder to injure...others have more because they are experienced combatants and have learned how to turn near fatal blows into mere scratches by skillful maneuvering...and then others are just plain lucky. Once a character runs out of hit points they become vulnerable to serious life-threatening injuries.

So what exactly does it mean to "hit" with a successful attack roll, then?
It means that through your own skill and ability you may have wounded your target if the target lacks the hit points to avoid the full brunt of the attack. That's an important thing to keep in mind; a successful "hit" does not necessarily mean you physically damaged your target. It just means that your attack was well placed and forced the target to exert themselves in such a way as to leave them vulnerable to further attacks. For example, instead of severing the target's arm, the attack merely grazes them leaving a minor cut.

But the attack did 25 points of damage! Why did it only "graze" the target?
Because the target has more than 25 hit points. Your attack forced them to exert a lot of energy to avoid the attack, but because of their combat skill, toughness, stamina and luck, they managed to avoid being seriously injured. However, because of this attack, they may not have the reserves to avoid your next attack. Perhaps you knocked them off balance or the attack left them so fatigued they lack the stamina to evade another attack. It's the DM's call on how they want to narrate the exact reason the blow didn't kill or wound the target.

Yeah, but what about "touch" attacks that rely on physical contact?
Making physical contact with a target is a lot different than striking them, so these types of attacks are the exception. If a touch attack succeeds, the attacker manages to make contact with their target.

If hit points and weapon damage don't always represent actual damage to the target, then what does it represent?
Think of the damage from an attack as more like a "threat level" rather than actual physical damage that transfers directly to the target's body. That is, the more damage an attack does, the harder it is to avoid serious injury. For example, an attack that causes 14 points of damage is more likely to wound the target than 3 points of damage (depending on how many hit points the target has left). The higher the damage, the greater the chance is that the target will become seriously injured. So, an attack that does 34 points of damage could be thought of as a "threat level of 34." If the target doesn't have the hit points to negate that threat, they become seriously injured.

Ok, but shouldn't armor reduce the amount of damage delivered from an attack?
It does reduce damage; by making it harder for an attack to cause serious injury. A successful hit against an armored target suggests that the attack may have circumvented the target's armor by striking in a vulnerable area.

What about poison and other types of non-combat damage?
Hit point loss from non-physical forms of damage represents the character spitting the poison out just in time before it takes full strength or perhaps the poison just wasn't strong enough to affect them drastically, but still weakens them. Again, it's the DMs call on how to narrate the reasons why the character avoids serious harm from the damage.

If hit points don't don't represent actual damage then how does that make sense with spells like Cure Serious Wounds and other forms of healing like healer kits with bandages?
Hit points do represent some physical damage, just not serious physical damage. Healing magic and other forms of healing still affect these minor wounds just as well as more serious wounds. For example, bandaging up minor cuts and abrasions helps the character rejuvenate and relieve the pain and/or fatigue of hit point loss. The key thing to remember is that it's an abstraction that allows the DM freedom to interpret and narrate it as they see fit.

What if my attack reduces the target to 0 or less hit points?
If a player is reduced to 0 or less hit points they are wounded. If a monster or NPC is reduce to 0 or less hit points they are killed.

Why are monsters killed immediately and not players?
Because unless the monsters are crucial to the story, it makes combat resolution much faster. It is assumed that players immediately execute a coup de grace on wounded monsters as a finishing move.

What if a character is wounded by poison or other types of non-physical damage?
If a character becomes wounded from non-combat damage they still receive the effects of being wounded, regardless if they show any physical signs of injury (i.e., internal injuries are still considered injuries).

Ok. I get it...but what happens once a character is wounded?
See below.
 

Damage and Dying

Once a character is reduced to 0 or less hit points, they start taking real damage. In other words, their reserves have run out and they can no longer avoid taking serious damage.

  1. Characters are fully operational as long as they have 1 hit point or more. They may have minor cuts, bruises, and superficial wounds, but they are are not impaired significantly. 
  2. Once they reach 0 or less hit points, they become Wounded (see below).That is, they have sustained a wound that impairs their ability to perform actions.
  3. If they reach a negative amount of hit points equal or greater than their Constitution score, they are Incapacitated. This means they are in critical condition and could possibly die.
  4. Characters will die if their hit points reach a negative amount greater than their Constitution score, plus their current level.

Unharmed: 1 hp or more
Wounded: 0 hp or less
Incapacitated: -(Constitution) to -(Constitution+Level)
Dead: Less than -(Constitution +Level)

Wounded
When the character reaches 0 or less hit points they become wounded. Wounded characters receive disadvantage on all attacks and saving throws until they heal back up to 1 hit point or more. This allows for a transitory stage between healthy and dying, without having to mess around with impairment rules while the character still has hit points left.

Incapacitated
Characters begin dying when they reach a negative amount of hit points equal to their Constitution score. At which point, they must make a DC 10 Constitution saving throw on each of their following turns (the disadvantage from being wounded does not apply for these saving throws).

If successful, the character remains dying, but their condition does not worsen.

If the saving throw fails, another DC 10 Constitution saving throw must be made. If that one fails, the character succumbs to their wounds and dies. If successful, the character stabilizes and is no longer dying.

Finally, if a dying character receives first aid or healing at any point, they immediately stabilize.

Dead
Characters will die if they reach a negative amount of hit points equal to their Constitution, plus their current level. Thus, if an 8th level character with a Constitution score of 12 is down to 4 hit points then takes 24 points of damage (reducing their hit points to -20) the attack kills them outright.

I still want to know how Dark Sun can be mixed with non dying settings...

If you think my english is bad, just wait until you see my spanish and my italian. Defiling languages is an art.

Eberron works just fine. Baker wrote in enough wriggle room that the setting will probably only get stale after extensive use.

Gold is for the mistress, silver for the maid

Copper for the craftsman, cunning at his trade.

"Good!" said the Baron, sitting in his hall,

"But Iron -- Cold Iron -- is master of them all." -Kipling

 

Miss d20 Modern? Take a look at Dias Ex Machina Game's UltraModern 4e!

 

57019168 wrote:
I am a hero, not a chump.

  1. I don't want the core rulebooks to be tied to any one setting. Gods should be examples drawn from RW mythology or something.

  2. I want to see a reasonable, but not suicidal, range of setting supported overall. There is no reason why both PoL and Greyhawk shouldn't be given house room.

  3. I'd rather see a version of FR promoted in which, one way or another, my large volume of material from the Time of Troubles to the beginning of 3e is not rendered obsolete. Selfish, I know. If they can find a way of satisfying the Spellplague-era players as well, fine and good.

  4. I absolutely do not want to see a mish-mash of all settings in one world, as proposed by the OP.


Z.




These.

I'd like the core rules to remain generic and untied to any setting. Keep any specific gods out of the rulebooks. I also want each setting to remain separate.

Furthermore, I'd like to see an officially supported Hyborian setting. 


These for me too. and i wuld like a total reboot of each setting,for the most part are really worn out now.
DM: Products of MY Imagination ©. Since 1986.
Germany is largely indistinghable from Colorado, but there's more than enough differences between the two settings to justify seperate resource manuals.
All these various concepts can be crammed into a single, unified setting - the D&D setting with the release of D&D Next.


I thought that was called Spelljammer, with Krynnspace and Torilspace and Oerthspace...
Yeah,but he was talking about a single planet..at least this was what i understood.
DM: Products of MY Imagination ©. Since 1986.
Germany is largely indistinghable from Colorado, but there's more than enough differences between the two settings to justify seperate resource manuals.


I'm not being funny here - what was this in response to, and what position are you defending or attacking?

But to join the thought experiment for a moment - Germany c 1400 and Colorado c 1400 were very different places.

Z.
I'm not being funny here - what was this in response to, and what position are you defending or attacking?

The very premise of the thread.

Yes, all of the campaign settings are repaints, remixes, and tweaks of more or the less the same thing.
However, it's the specific tweaks that make those campaign settings be discrete campaign settings.

Colorado and Germany may appear to be roughly homogenized right now, but the unique histories and traits of each are very relevant to anyone who cares.  That's what a campaign setting does. 
Conversely, someone could easily wear lederhosen in Denver and get little more than a few double-takes.  That's what 'D&D Blender' does.
I think it is fine if there's a 'PoL' like the 4e one as a sort of example/baseline that you can build off of. The other settings can stay unique. The 4e approach didn't seem BAD, though I understand the annoyance of cross polination where you have dragonborn showing up in FR or DS. Still, I think a lot of especially newer players were excited to use the new races in the existing settings. It isn't like they were really inappropriate in most cases. Leaving that as an option seemed OK to me. Published material for those settings can ignore those races (except maybe say like where Dray are portrayed using the dragonborn mechanics for instance).

I have no opinions on things like what version of FR they should use, assuming FR is even touched in this edition. Frankly if I were WotC I'd back burner setting design until DDN is released. Provide some basic referents to PoL material where you need flavor, but basically do what 1e did. You pretty much don't refer to any setting or setting material in core books. If you mention some gods as examples or whatever then that's what they are examples. Maybe the back of the DMG does what the 4e DMG did and provides 'Nentir Vale' as an easy launching off point for DMs to make a setting and drop in modules so they can just play. Cosmology and whatnot can be addressed in supplements in some fashion.
That is not dead which may eternal lie
If you want to keep the 4e pantheon( ie rave queen) thats fine, but have the nentir vale and its world placed as its own setting.


the 5e should not be attached to any setting OR it should have:

The Deities lsited here are examples and may or may not exist in each setting the same way if they appear at all 

The races listed here may or may not be presented the same way or appear in each setting 



and give the FR it's total pantheon back( except Tyr and whats her name the undead drow lady, they interlopers anyway)

and keep the PoL rules out of each setting
a mask everyone has at least two of, one they wear in public and another they wear in private.....
Or simply no "Core" deities whatsoever.
Or simply no "Core" deities whatsoever.



tried saying that before, but some of the DMs around here shot me down saying that they liked the deity section and that they used them when they were building their own worlds if they didnt have the time to detail it all out.
a mask everyone has at least two of, one they wear in public and another they wear in private.....
Or simply no "Core" deities whatsoever.



tried saying that before, but some of the DMs around here shot me down saying that they liked the deity section and that they used them when they were building their own worlds if they didnt have the time to detail it all out.



 I would be OK with that, except that there's got to be SOMETHING for the Cleric and Paladin to worship, and putting just one all-purpose deity would be somewhat monotheistic.

 Even though I prefer the 4e pantheon, perhaps the best way to simultaneously present deities AND remain setting-neutral is to pick and choose deities from several settings that are exemplary of the classic portfolios from several settings (i.e., Avandra for Luck, Sune for Love, Pelor for the Sun, Traveller the Trickster, etc) without endorsing any one pantheon over another.

Wounds Module [updated for Basic]

Proficiency Module

Or simply no "Core" deities whatsoever.



tried saying that before, but some of the DMs around here shot me down saying that they liked the deity section and that they used them when they were building their own worlds if they didnt have the time to detail it all out.



 I would be OK with that, except that there's got to be SOMETHING for the Cleric and Paladin to worship, and putting just one all-purpose deity would be somewhat monotheistic.

 Even though I prefer the 4e pantheon, perhaps the best way to simultaneously present deities AND remain setting-neutral is to pick and choose deities from several settings that are exemplary of the classic portfolios from several settings (i.e., Avandra for Luck, Sune for Love, Pelor for the Sun, Traveller the Trickster, etc) without endorsing any one pantheon over another.



oh they could list a few deities of g, u and e alignments and makes sure its pounded into both the DM and players that they are sample deities and dont exist in any of the settings.

on the otherhand they could point out that the deities are listed in the campain setting books or the setting player books.



        
a mask everyone has at least two of, one they wear in public and another they wear in private.....
To be honest, with WotC spotty track record with settings, they can make what ever they want and I will wait to judge it by the reaction of the reviews.

Member of the Axis of Awesome

Show
Homogenising: Making vanilla in 31 different colours
Yeah,but he was talking about a single planet..at least this was what i understood.


Actually, if you read the entire post, it's an entire solar system.

I still want to know how Dark Sun can be mixed with non dying settings...


Well, I don't actually own anything Dark Sun so I don't know all the details of the setting, nor all the details of the other settings for that matter, and when I think of it, I think Psionics, Defiling, Desert - not Dying Earth - and that could all fit on the same planet with Forgotten Realms and the rest.  If you want it to be a seperate planet, then there's the rest of the solar system you can throw it in.

Again, if you actually read the entire post, I also put up the idea of leaving all the old settings behind and just carrying the core concepts of those settings forward into a new unified setting encompassing this whole solar system.
how to mix DS in with the other settings......




well FR has a solar system

Greyhawk has one


DL has one I'm sure


Eberron might have one


Paizo's pathfinder has one.




how to mix DS a post apocolyptic the planet is dying into a setting where other planets still live.

well, have magic went arye and the deities left it by whatever spell did it. taking life with them.


or jsut take a look at how Paizo did their solar system for their setting, they even have life out there.... and they have dead planets too in it.                         
a mask everyone has at least two of, one they wear in public and another they wear in private.....
Yeah,but he was talking about a single planet..at least this was what i understood.


Actually, if you read the entire post, it's an entire solar system.

I still want to know how Dark Sun can be mixed with non dying settings...


Well, I don't actually own anything Dark Sun so I don't know all the details of the setting, nor all the details of the other settings for that matter, and when I think of it, I think Psionics, Defiling, Desert - not Dying Earth - and that could all fit on the same planet with Forgotten Realms and the rest.  If you want it to be a seperate planet, then there's the rest of the solar system you can throw it in.

Again, if you actually read the entire post, I also put up the idea of leaving all the old settings behind and just carrying the core concepts of those settings forward into a new unified setting encompassing this whole solar system.

You don't have to own the settings, Wikipedia has useful articles about D&D settings. It can help you to determine the level of compatibility between settings, and why we do not think the same things at all when we think about these settings.

There is more than one setting difficult to merge with others.

Dark Sun : 
The nature of defiling makes that the Dark Sun setting can't exist on the same planet as other settings.
The restriction on divine magic would needs a big good explanation on a plane shared with other settings.
And the dying sun makes that I want a different solar system to throw the planet in it.

FR :
Very agressive pantheist system that severely limits liberty of choice. Incompatible with Eberron divine profile or the almost inexistent divine forces of Dark Sun.

Eberron :
Very advanced magic and psionic setting. Ambitious, powerful and agressive enough to try and succeed to conquer settings like dragonlance or FR. I don't think any other setting could resist an organized attack from Eberron if economic power can be gained in the process.
Very disceet divine system leaving a lot of freedom to the followers. Incompatible with FR or Dragonlance.

Ravenloft :
It was lost somewhere in the ethereal plane. Dark Powers rule Ravenloft and are omnipotents within this pocket dimension. Hard to integrate in another setting depending on the divine profile of the setting. It would far easier to integrate to Dark Sun than to FR, for example, but it would make no sense thematically.

PS : And Dark Sun have the best gnomes of all settings…

If you think my english is bad, just wait until you see my spanish and my italian. Defiling languages is an art.

I'm not sure why epicfreak wants settings merged in a scientific way (ala solar systems).  D&D is a fantasy game, not a sci fi game.  When Copernicus revealed the solar system, we were pretty much at the end of the historical period on which fantasy is loosely based.

That's why I suggested Spelljammer, which uses dimensions and astral travel, rather than planets and solar systems.  It also resolves most of the issues with separation.  Why isn't Dark Sun leeching power from Forgotten Realms?  Because only spelljammers can travel between worlds and they can't carry enough cargo to make a difference.  Why aren't the gods of Greyhawk's Oerth mucking about in Ravenloft's godless Dread Domains?  Because deities have great trouble influencing worlds beyond their own.

If you want a unifying setting, Spelljammer's your guy.  Alternately, Sigil's City of Doors can also work.  Heck, use them both.

That would be my dream for DDN
DM: Products of MY Imagination ©. Since 1986.
Sign In to post comments