Three New 5e Settings Confirmed

[jaappleton]

https://comicbook.com/gaming/news/dungeons-dragons-classic-campaign-setting-books-5e/

Within the next "year or two", we can expect the return of three classic 5E settings.

Spelljammer Confirmed?

[Appleheart]

Very interesting to see which 3 it'll be.

Planescape and/or Spelljammer seems like a given. Would they do both though, or just the one? They occupy a somewhat similar style and thematic space.

Dark Sun still feels like a likely option, especially when/if we see more Psionics published.

Could we get a proper Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting? SCAG wasn't great, and it has been commented on in the past how its a possibility at least.

Or maybe Ravenloft?

[cutlery]

Any of Planescape, Darksun, or Spelljammer sounds great - I confess I am most interested in Darksun, though it has been an age since I've read any sourcebooks for it.

[ProsecutorGodot]

Very interesting to see which 3 it'll be.

Planescape and/or Spelljammer seems like a given. Would they do both though, or just the one? They occupy a somewhat similar style and thematic space.

Dark Sun still feels like a likely option, especially when/if we see more Psionics published.

Could we get a proper Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting? SCAG wasn't great, and it has been commented on in the past how its a possibility at least.

Or maybe Ravenloft?

I believe Ravenloft is all but confirmed now with the knowledge from the dungeons and diversity article mentioning Vistani would be in upcoming books.

Spell Jammer, Dark Sun and Ravenloft make the most sense with what bits of development and hints we've seen from WotC.

So I'm pretty excited for Greyhawk, Dragonlance and SCAG 2

[Zhorn]

I'm hoping for Spelljammer personally.

Transitive settings like Spelljammer and Planescape seem like the easiest to tie in relevance to other settings, so even if they only have the one setting book, it can be used as a jumping off point or a link between other existing or future settings. Add a portal in Sigil over here, a crystal sphere over there...

I do hope there's a chance for Darksun considering all the clamouring I hear for it. But with my barest surface level understanding of some of the more common themes in Darksun, and the current ... climate ... of the modern day, I think that one might be shelved for a bit longer :smallfrown:

Dragonlance or Greyhawk?

If they go for another MtG setting, Innistrad seems like an easy place to pair in some Barrovia themed content considering the attention that has gotten recently.

[Appleheart]

I believe ravenloft is all but confirmed now with the knowledge from the dungeons and diversity article mentioning they would be in upcoming books.

Spell hammer, Dark Sun and Ravenloft make the most sense with what bits of development and hints we've seen from WotC.

So I'm pretty excited for Greyhawk, Dragonlance and SCAG 2

Oh good call-out! I had forgotten about that already.

Yeah, Spelljammer/Planescape, Dark Sun, and Ravenloft then.

Fingers crossed! :D

[micahaphone]

All the previous planeshift MTG pdfs are being expanded into full setting books? Great!

[RossN]

I'd love to see Spelljammer and Dragonlance.

Maybe Al-Qadim? I think there is still a lot of nostalgia there, we only recently had a live action Aladdin from Disney and Zakhara is conveniently also on Toril.

[Miele]

I read somewhere a while ago that Mystara was being considered, but it may have been just a nostalgic rumor.

Dragonlance is extremely tied to the Chronicles storyline, it would be weird playing before clerics returned and from there to the end of the trilogy it was maybe one year if I recall correctly, may be slightly more. I played as DM the original campaign using the books' characters (there were 12 playable ones) with AD&D 2e and it wasn't very exciting, considering half the table knew the story inside out.

[x3n0n]

I think the newest "spooky" UA subclasses are prep for Ravenloft.

I will be curious to see how much psionic support they kept in Tasha's.
Confirmed already: Mind Sliver and Mind Thrust (as Tasha's Mind Whip), psionic sorcerer.
UAed and IMO likely: psionic fighter and rogue.
UA without strong evidence either way (again, IMO): psionic feats, some common psionic mechanic, other psionic spells
If they kept enough support, Dark Sun becomes a real possibility.

I don't have any good educated guess about the third.

[Unoriginal]

Spelljammer stuff has been showing in a lot of adventures and books lately, so I'd say it's likely it goes in.

Psionics getting in the game with Tasha's Cauldron of Everything means Darksun is also likely

[jaappleton]

Bad news: All three settings are different versions of the Forgotten Realms, all set during different time periods

[Wildstag]

Oh good call-out! I had forgotten about that already.

Yeah, Spelljammer/Planescape, Dark Sun, and Ravenloft then.

Fingers crossed! :D

Ravenloft isn't likely as one of the three I'd think. They've already done Ravenloft this edition, and it sounded more like they were talking about previously unvisited settings.

The panel in the article is on the Dungeons & Dragons youtube page, uploaded just now, and under the title "Inside the D&D Studio | Panel | D&D Celebration".

[zinycor]

Bad news: All three settings are different versions of the Forgotten Realms, all set during different time periods

I can see that being cool. Like forgotten realms but with modern technology.

[Fnissalot]

With the horror themed UA and all the focus on psionics for tashas, I would assume Ravenloft (even if curse of stradh already exists) and dark sun.

I would rather want Spelljammer, Dark Sun, and Dragonlance though. The first two for their odd out their flavor and the third for being closer to my classical view of fantasy and all the knights and stupid things in the setting would be great fun for the 5e. Who doesn't want to play a gully dwarf? And Lord Soth requires a proper adventure! And yeah, the old adventures seemed a bit railroady and played it to close to the novels.

[zinycor]

I would also like a completely new setting too.

[ProsecutorGodot]

Ravenloft isn't likely as one of the three I'd think. They've already done Ravenloft this edition, and it sounded more like they were talking about previously unvisited settings.

The panel in the article is on the Dungeons & Dragons youtube page, uploaded just now, and under the title "Inside the D&D Studio | Panel | D&D Celebration".

I disagree, we already know there will be new books (two of them) featuring Vistani. Curse of Strahd doesn't necessarily give enough information to call it a setting guide. My assumption is that we'll have a setting guide and another adventure set there, either an exploration into actually destroying Strahd for good or fighting the Dark Power in a plane of dread.

[Willie the Duck]

I read somewhere a while ago that Mystara was being considered, but it may have been just a nostalgic rumor.
A guy named Glen Welch has been working on a Mystara guide, and hoping to be allowed to release it on DM's Guild or similar. That might be what you heard. I've looked at an early draft, it looks like an interpretation of what Mystara should be (not sure that something like Mystara even has a definitive version).


Dragonlance is extremely tied to the Chronicles storyline, it would be weird playing before clerics returned and from there to the end of the trilogy it was maybe one year if I recall correctly, may be slightly more. I played as DM the original campaign using the books' characters (there were 12 playable ones) with AD&D 2e and it wasn't very exciting, considering half the table knew the story inside out.
I had the 1e campaign setting. It was fine as a base background world if you wanted to play after clerics returned, assuming you were willing to jettison any meta-plot of 'what-comes-next.' I just don't know anyone that has strong feelings about the setting anymore. I feel that its heyday was in the 80s, while most of the rest carried on better in the 90s (or even had a 3e/4e revival).

Honestly, though. Dark Sun and Spelljammer seem like they are best designed as places where the PCs can actually do stuff. Ravenloft was the most crippling in that regards (nothing you do matters, the lords and mists control all and stop your best efforts, etc. etc.) so I assume they are going to do major surgery to that one. Planescape might be more popular than Spelljammer, so it might take precedence. So my guess would be Dark Sun, Planescape, and Ravenloft.

[AttilatheYeon]

Here's hoping for Spelljammer, then Darksun, then Dragonlance.

[jaappleton]

My personal bets are as follows:

Ravenloft
Sigil
Spelljammer

They already alluded to a Ravenloft setting, though that could be an update to the Return to Castle Ravenloft adventure. But that’s my first pick.

Perkins loves Sigil. He’s said numerous times it was his favorite setting.

Spelljammer is high on people’s lists.

I know so many want Dark Sun. I know! But I think them releasing Psionics is enough to say, “You already know the setting, now you have the mechanics, you don’t need us to do more to run it”.

[KorvinStarmast]

Within the next "year or two", we can expect the return of three classic 5E settings. Spelljammer Confirmed? I hope not, but I expect so given that Eberron got the nod.

I believe Ravenloft ... Likely. I would prefer Dark Sun.

So I'm pretty excited for Greyhawk, Dragonlance and SCAG 2 Dragonlance: let it stay in the dustbin of history. Fun for a few novels, but otherwise not a fan.

Greyhawk: I'd be cool with that, but given the violence already done to the original setting since the EGG's departure, I'd likely not be happy with it.

I'd love to see Spelljammer and Dragonlance. Our tastes differ, and if I have to have one of those two, Spelljammer it is. Pirates of the Astral Plane! :smallcool:

Maybe Al-Qadim? Really?

Bad news: All three settings are different versions of the Forgotten Realms, all set during different time periods Not sure why you put that into blue text, it looks like something WoTC/Hasbro would do.

And heck, why not flesh out Cormyr, Kara Tur, and Thay?

[PhoenixPhyre]

I would also like a completely new setting too.

I'd love for something that breaks out of the FR/legacy mold. Not just re-using a setting designed for another IP (either an earlier D&D edition or another game entirely). Something like what Eberron did for 3e--showing what a "built for 5e" setting would look like, without any of the legacy/outside cruft.

[KorvinStarmast]

I'd love for something that breaks out of the FR/legacy mold. Not just re-using a setting designed for another IP (either an earlier D&D edition or another game entirely). Something like what Eberron did for 3e--showing what a "built for 5e" setting would look like, without any of the legacy/outside cruft. Heh, I wish they'd do a contest. I have a setting that might just fit what they need.

Arcane Casters are limited to: Warlocks. (No hexblades, yes Genii, fix Undying)
Divine Casters are limited to: Druids
No Bards. (If you make a Rogue with Entertainer Background, and with Expertise in Performance and Persuasion, you've got a bard already ...)

There are no deities; there are elemental forces, Forces and Philosophies, the Positive and Negative material Planes, and there are the forces of Law and Chaos separated by the cosmic borderlands / no mans land of Neutrality.
The two axis model is dispensed with.

[RossN]

Bad news: All three settings are different versions of the Forgotten Realms, all set during different time periods

Actually I legitimately think the 2e version of Netheril (https://www.dmsguild.com/product/17546/Netheril-Empire-of-Magic-2e?filters=45471_0_45396_0_0_0_0_0#:~:text=The%20A rcane%20Age%20is%203520,Forgotten%20Realms%2C%20in %201370%20DR.) was a very cool setting.



Really?

Yes, why not? :smallconfused:

I don't expect Al-Qadim to come back, even with the appearance of the Noble Genie Warlock Patron but it is a fun setting with a lot of adventure opportunity.

[PhoenixPhyre]

Heh, I wish they'd do a contest. I have a setting that might just fit what they need.

Arcane Casters are limited to: Warlocks. (No hexblades, yes Genii, fix Undying)
Divine Casters are limited to: Druids
No Bards. (If you make a Rogue with Entertainer Background, and with Expertise in Performance and Persuasion, you've got a bard already ...)

There are no deities; there are elemental forces, Forces and Philosophies, and there are the forces of Law, Chaos, and the cosmic borderlands Neutrality. The two axis model is dispensed with.

I have one as well, but they'd never take it because it does total violence to the "standard multiverse" planar model. It's a 5e kitchen sink, but coherent (I hope). Basically a total lore reboot, but mechanically compliant with minimal changes.

[KorvinStarmast]

Yes, why not? :smallconfused: I get the feeling that they don't predict a market for that, at least under that name, just as "Oriental Adventures" is likely low on their list of "let's resurrect this" for a variety or reasons.
I do agree with you in re the Genie Warlock being a nice addition. And if they do it, well color me surprised and it could be great fun, yeah.
The first person who names their Bard, College of Whispers, Jafar needs to be drawn and quartered, however. :smallyuk: I remember when every sorcerer in Diablo (on battle.net, OG Diablo) seemed to be named Raistlin{number}. :tongue:

[Waazraath]

1) Al-Qadim - already played a converted 5e campaign up to 5, love to see it taken further!
2) Dark Sun - never played it and really curious
3) Planescape - interesting setting with loads of options and epic scope

I could live with Greyhawk or Dragonlance as well.

Question: I played a spelljammer campaign once as a player. I known nothing of the lore, or how good it was executed. But it felt a bit - dunno, ill-fitting. Could people who know it explain a bit what's good about it?

[Cicciograna]

I remember that recently WotC announced a MtG set taking from the Forgotten Realms lore. Knowing this, would you think that, then, a new FR setting book is...


more probable to be released, as this will allow WotC to tie more closely its top-selling products;
less probable, considering that there's already one flagship dealing with it;
not influenced, publicationwise, by the MtG FR card set.

Pick your poison.
Even if I know that it has become a messfest, I have fond memories of the FR, and would love to have something new to chew on.

[Amechra]

Clearly, the three settings are going to be The Council of Wyrms, Ghostwalk, and Mahasapra.

Actually, in all seriousness, I'd love a 5e Ghostwalk. The original version was released in that weird transitional period between 3.0 and 3.5, so the mechanics were very rough.

[Telwar]

I'd assume we would see more psionics playtesting if Dark Sun were to come out. I suppose they could have just the one subclass of sorcerer as the "psion," and then disallow all the other sorcerer subclasses. And then have preserver/defiler wizard subclasses, and only have those. It's a little kludgey, but could work. Personally, I'd rather have a spell point variant sort of like the mystic, but I long ago learned to expect disappointment from them.

A revised and *significantly* more detailed Forgotten Realms setting, more along the lines of the Wildemont or Eberron books than SCAG, could be coming. It's not like they don't have a ton of material already printed from previous editions that can be pretty easily updated. This would also let them do things like introduce non-EVIL drow into the setting, as an actual force rather than refugees. "Oh, yeah, those Lloth-worshipping freaks? (Sigh) Ruining our name for generations. We try not to have anything to do with them. Jerks.". And they can synergize it with their publishing arm, too, get a nice push from that.

[Wildstag]

I disagree, we already know there will be new books (two of them) featuring Vistani. Curse of Strahd doesn't necessarily give enough information to call it a setting guide. My assumption is that we'll have a setting guide and another adventure set there, either an exploration into actually destroying Strahd for good or fighting the Dark Power in a plane of dread.

The quote from Winniger is "we're going to try to um, stretch the boundaries of D&D by putting more settings out there, more places where you can set your own adventures... there are three of the old settings that we're working on right now".

The way that comment is worded makes it sound to me more like the projects in the works are settings that haven't already been expanded upon in 5e (more settings out there, not "expanding some settings").

That's why I feel like an expanded Forgotten Realms or a Ravenloft setting book is not likely; because if they were, he'd have used language more along the lines of "adding to settings" rather than "putting more settings out there". Emphasis on the word "more".

[ProsecutorGodot]

The quote from Winniger is "we're going to try to um, stretch the boundaries of D&D by putting more settings out there, more places where you can set your own adventures... there are three of the old settings that we're working on right now".

The way that comment is worded makes it sound to me more like the projects in the works are settings that haven't already been expanded upon in 5e (more settings out there, not "expanding some settings").

That's why I feel like an expanded Forgotten Realms or a Ravenloft setting book is not likely; because if they were, he'd have used language more along the lines of "adding to settings" rather than "putting more settings out there". Emphasis on the word "more".

I guess there's always the chance that the two books about Vistani are divorced from Ravenloft, although that seems unlikely.

I suppose they could also introduce the Ravenloft stuff and just say it's not part of that three, in which case we'd actually be getting 4 setting things.

But I think the most likely thing is that they agree with the general consensus (at least that I've observed) that Curse of Strahd, while great, is not a Ravenloft setting guide. There really isn't a lot of exploration further into the setting in CoS.

[Kyutaru]

It'd be nice to see the MTG setting too with a full planescape treatment. If Spelljammer is a thing then we should be traveling there somehow if they want to join the universes.

[Comaward]

My personal bets are as follows:

Ravenloft
Sigil
Spelljammer

I know so many want Dark Sun. I know! But I think them releasing Psionics is enough to say, “You already know the setting, now you have the mechanics, you don’t need us to do more to run it”.

I’ve been suspecting the same recently.

Which is why the only thing I’m really waiting for is Tasha’s, and then I’ll get started on preparing a proper Dark Sun campaign for my players.

[LudicSavant]

Bad news: All three settings are different versions of the Forgotten Realms, all set during different time periods

Dammit jaappleton, you're going to give me nightmares saying things like that! :smalleek::smalleek::smalleek::smalltongue:

[Lille]

Actually, in all seriousness, I'd love a 5e Ghostwalk. The original version was released in that weird transitional period between 3.0 and 3.5, so the mechanics were very rough.

Not going to lie, I came here just to say exactly that. AFAIK it was basically just forgotten about after a single book, but even that looked pretty interesting.

[Mikal]

Let’s go Birthright 5th edition! It’s time to run some kingdoms!

(It won’t be birthright)

[Wildstag]

I guess there's always the chance that the two books about Vistani are divorced from Ravenloft, although that seems unlikely.

I suppose they could also introduce the Ravenloft stuff and just say it's not part of that three, in which case we'd actually be getting 4 setting things.

But I think the most likely thing is that they agree with the general consensus (at least that I've observed) that Curse of Strahd, while great, is not a Ravenloft setting guide. There really isn't a lot of exploration further into the setting in CoS.

The hype around Ravenloft in the last two decades has really only favored the Curse of Strahd, so I would find it very unlikely that they'd make a big Ravenloft setting guide that only included that realm when there's already a campaign book solely focused on the titular Count. When's the last time you heard any discussion about any of the other Realms of Dread from anyone actually playing 5e?

Plus, he said "three of the old settings" not "three books of the old settings", so the idea that two Vistani books would be included in that "three of the old settings" would mean that somehow the Vistani are relevant to two campaign settings, when really they're only relevant to one.


My hope is that Greyhawk, Planescape, and Dragonlance return.

[jaappleton]

Dammit jaappleton, you're going to give me nightmares saying things like that! :smalleek::smalleek::smalleek::smalltongue:

Actually.... I believe the article calls for three classic settings... Yes?

Full Disclosure: I KNOW NOTHING OF LORE BEFORE 5E

But

Remember my topic about the Black Obelisks?

That they’re the key to bringing back the Netheril Empire?

Could THAT be one of the settings? That world?

[rooneg]

I'm thinking Ravenloft (because they've talked about doing another book with the Vistani in it), Spelljammer (because SO MUCH stuff from Spelljammer has been turning up in other books), and Dark Sun (because they've clearly been thinking a lot about Psionics). I'd love to have a Dragonlance setting, but I can't imagine they'll do it, fundamentally it's too similar to Forgotten Realms, I think they'll want their new books to scratch a different itch.

[jaappleton]

I'm thinking Ravenloft (because they've talked about doing another book with the Vistani in it), Spelljammer (because SO MUCH stuff from Spelljammer has been turning up in other books), and Dark Sun (because they've clearly been thinking a lot about Psionics). I'd love to have a Dragonlance setting, but I can't imagine they'll do it, fundamentally it's too similar to Forgotten Realms, I think they'll want their new books to scratch a different itch.

There is one thing that gives me hope for Dragonlance.

Go back to the PHB. There’s these dark gray sidebars sprinkled throughout.

They mention Deurgar. Death Domain. Oathbreaker.

All things which have seen release.

EXCEPT.

Draconians.

And there is a movie being made. It’s written and directed by John Francés Daley. You know, the kid from Freaks and Geeks? He played Sweets in the FOX show Bones? Also wrote Spider Man: Homecoming and Horrible Bosses, directed Game Night?

There’s a lot of rumors they’re going with Dragonlance as the setting.

[Dark.Revenant]

My bet is Ravenloft, Spelljammer, and Planescape. Replace Planescape with MTG book if you're pessimistic.

"At least three" suggests they might be on the fence about Dragonlance.

[animewatcha]

Maybe I am making a wrong correlation here. I don't follow 5e dnd lore much and what not.

They part ways with mike mearls and they are releasing bunch of more content now afterwards?? I know Mike 'moved on' a while ago, but still curious.

[jaappleton]

Maybe I am making a wrong correlation here. I don't follow 5e dnd lore much and what not.

They part ways with mike mearls and they are releasing bunch of more content now afterwards?? I know Mike 'moved on' a while ago, but still curious.

Only informing, let’s please not derail the topic:

Mearls is still there. He never left. He was the liaison to Larian Studios for awhile as they developed Baldur’s Gate 3 but Mearls is still fully employed by WOTC.

[rlc]

There were some people from Kara-Tur in some adventure, and I could see them doing diversity stuff with that, but I'm not sure if that counts as a different setting.

[KorvinStarmast]

Mearls is still there. He never left. He was the liaison to Larian Studios for awhile as they developed Baldur’s Gate 3 but Mearls is still fully employed by WOTC. Thanks for confirming that. Sorry, and I'll ask about BG 3 in another place.

[Spriteless]

People have said Dark Sun? Yeah, first post. I could see the starting adventure with the 'eat the rich' angle, but not the setting where other city states are still slavers.

Time to bring out my weird penchant for crufty 3E books.

Scarred Lands was so edgy! And it came out before the 3e Monster Manual did! And it had like 4 times the Prestige Classes as the DMG! But, nowadays, merely mentioning that a lawful evil kept wife wouldn't be able to process if a Goddess of Free Love enchanted her, doesn't make up for a setting where the elves kidnap and raise humans to bear their children. Even if, if you think about it, it's not much worse than how the lawful evil kept wife was sold to her husband by her family. Also, it already has a PDF and a fixit fic novel that ties everything up.

Diamond Throne from Arcana Unleashed/Evolved has, civilization, comparatively balanced arcane magic, and skill monkeys that tap into the memory of the land. Was worked on by Monte Cooke, who might have had enough of a break with D&D that he wouldn't mind helping?

Blue Rose, has Good as Kindness and Nature vs Evil as Pride and Slavery. It was gay friendly before it was trendy. It is meant for "Romantic Fantasy" which means teamwork and feel good morality. Chris Perkins worked on it. Actually works better with AGE, but D&D 5 is simple enough that it wouldn't get in the way of playing.

Iron Kingdoms has mech armors, and I don't even know whether the war game came first or the RPG, and which was the spin off. Might be nice to have some options powered by steam instead of arcana.

Iron Heroes has characters so awesome that if you give them 3e WBL magic items they will break the game. Also, Huns, with useful mounted archery and everything! All humans, setting seemed to imply that mounted archery was a new technology that kings feared. Mearls worked on it, Monte Cook released it on his imprint.

Hey, maybe I should look up Ghostwalk. I clearly enjoy reading about settings I never play or run.

[MrStabby]

My personal bets are as follows:

Ravenloft
Sigil
Spelljammer

They already alluded to a Ravenloft setting, though that could be an update to the Return to Castle Ravenloft adventure. But that’s my first pick.

Perkins loves Sigil. He’s said numerous times it was his favorite setting.

Spelljammer is high on people’s lists.

I know so many want Dark Sun. I know! But I think them releasing Psionics is enough to say, “You already know the setting, now you have the mechanics, you don’t need us to do more to run it”.

So I can see Ravenloft. I think CoS has been the most well recieved of adventures and Ravenloft is horror fantasy, which is close enough to the standard classical fantasy that it will appeal to those who play D&D whilst being different enough to justify a new purchase. It seems the ideal product to build on success.

Sigil... I would love to see this and also think it is pretty likely. So much flavour and I think that with Ravnica they showed that they could put a lot of thought into city settings in 5th.

Speaking of which... I suspect that spelljammer might be displaced by a MtG setting. It said classic, but that might be for different games. Dominaria might be the obvious one there, but I could see others. Personally I would love Mercadia.

[ProsecutorGodot]

Plus, he said "three of the old settings" not "three books of the old settings", so the idea that two Vistani books would be included in that "three of the old settings" would mean that somehow the Vistani are relevant to two campaign settings, when really they're only relevant to one.

Or, like I said earlier, that it will be two books, a setting guide and an adventure. 5E is in full swing at this point, the last two years will have given us 2 supplemental rulebooks, 4 additional campaign settings and 6 adventures come November when the cycle ends.

It's about time we've had more than one (two if you count Saltmarsh) full length adventure release that isn't part of FR. Neither of which have a setting guide to go with them.

Reintroducing "three of the old settings" could be done in any number of books.

[Luccan]

So, here's my question for those saying Dark Sun would be unacceptable: is it just that the dark themes exist in the setting at all? Because it's not like any of the horrible things people do to each other on Athas has ever been presented as good or even "necessary". in fact the world seems to mostly continue to die because of the cycle of power grabbing and violence, whereas peace and empathy could quite literally save it from power hungry wizards, if preservers became more common than defilers.

[RossN]

This one is very unlikely I admit but I'd love to see an update of some of the 'green cover' Historical Reference books (https://www.dmsguild.com/product/110324/HR1HR7-Historical-Reference-Series-2e-BUNDLE) from the 2e era - I still have my beloved moth-eaten copies of Age of Heroes (Ancient Greece) and The Glory of Rome.

[Mikal]

Actually.... I believe the article calls for three classic settings... Yes?

Full Disclosure: I KNOW NOTHING OF LORE BEFORE 5E

But

Remember my topic about the Black Obelisks?

That they’re the key to bringing back the Netheril Empire?

Could THAT be one of the settings? That world?

Very likely not. Netheril isn’t a world of a campaign setting. It’s an old nation of high magic in the realms.

Technically the heirs to netheril who escaped its destruction by escaping to the shadow plane and become shades have returned and the last I knew had conquered areas near Cormyr, including sembia

[Mikal]

People have said Dark Sun? Yeah, first post. I could see the starting adventure with the 'eat the rich' angle, but not the setting where other city states are still slavers.

Time to bring out my weird penchant for crufty 3E books.

Scarred Lands was so edgy! And it came out before the 3e Monster Manual did! And it had like 4 times the Prestige Classes as the DMG! But, nowadays, merely mentioning that a lawful evil kept wife wouldn't be able to process if a Goddess of Free Love enchanted her, doesn't make up for a setting where the elves kidnap and raise humans to bear their children. Even if, if you think about it, it's not much worse than how the lawful evil kept wife was sold to her husband by her family. Also, it already has a PDF and a fixit fic novel that ties everything up.

Diamond Throne from Arcana Unleashed/Evolved has, civilization, comparatively balanced arcane magic, and skill monkeys that tap into the memory of the land. Was worked on by Monte Cooke, who might have had enough of a break with D&D that he wouldn't mind helping?

Blue Rose, has Good as Kindness and Nature vs Evil as Pride and Slavery. It was gay friendly before it was trendy. It is meant for "Romantic Fantasy" which means teamwork and feel good morality. Chris Perkins worked on it. Actually works better with AGE, but D&D 5 is simple enough that it wouldn't get in the way of playing.

Iron Kingdoms has mech armors, and I don't even know whether the war game came first or the RPG, and which was the spin off. Might be nice to have some options powered by steam instead of arcana.

Iron Heroes has characters so awesome that if you give them 3e WBL magic items they will break the game. Also, Huns, with useful mounted archery and everything! All humans, setting seemed to imply that mounted archery was a new technology that kings feared. Mearls worked on it, Monte Cook released it on his imprint.

Hey, maybe I should look up Ghostwalk. I clearly enjoy reading about settings I never play or run.


Yeah pretty much all of these are owned by other publishers, and aren’t exactly what I’d call “classic”.
I’d call these long shots at best.

[PhoenixPhyre]

Very likely not. Netheril isn’t a world of a campaign setting. It’s an old nation of high magic in the realms.

Technically the heirs to netheril who escaped its destruction by escaping to the shadow plane and become shades have returned and the last I knew had conquered areas near Cormyr, including sembia

There's a distinction to be made, I think, between "campaign setting" and "new world". You can have multiple campaign settings in one world (FR for most of its run) or multiple worlds in one setting (Planescape, Spelljammer). But I agree that Netheril is less likely for the mentioned products.

[Miele]

A guy named Glen Welch has been working on a Mystara guide, and hoping to be allowed to release it on DM's Guild or similar. That might be what you heard. I've looked at an early draft, it looks like an interpretation of what Mystara should be (not sure that something like Mystara even has a definitive version).


...

I played a truckload of Mystara during the BECMI era and in all honesty, I remember it fondly only because it was my first experience with PnP RPGs and we spent several years, playing so much we almost ran out of published content. The world was the classic high fantasy, dwarves, elves, shadow elves, military humans aka Thyatis empire and magic user humans aka Alphatia empire which were in reality coming from another planet. The world was futuristic in origin but then something happened and it went back a millenium, but with the Radiance which made magic possible (like the Weave in FR).

If you read the timeline, it's just wars and other wars: pretty much every kingdom is bathed in blood for decades, gets pounded into the ground and comes back in a different shape. Lycanthropy is also widely present after a certain turn of events. To be honest, a DM following a calendar, would be challenged to find a long enough period of peace in which to set the adventures as what you "should" see around is pretty much scorched lands due to massive wars between kingdoms and factions.

I don't think it's a setting worth a damn to be honest, as I said I'm fond of it because it was the first love and I had good memories, but FR, just to mention one, is way better: more details, more interesting characters, more detailed cities, factions, kingdoms, races.

-----

Dark Sun was always mildly appealing to me, I'm not really into post apocalyptic settings ala Mad Max, which probably DS has partially used as a sort of inspirational background. It has cool ideas, I grant that and I wouldn't be against it in general, but should I vote for a setting right here and right now? Dragonlance would probably win, if only for the love I have for the books, which I read and read again times and times over the years (I think I read the two main trilogies at least 7 times each over 30 years, bear with me if I'm still in love with kenders).

I started playing in the mid-late 80s if I remember correctly and back then even having a shop with everything that was published was just a dream here in Italy, most shops that sold games usually got only the most important pieces of a certain franchise, we were lucky to find the Base and the Expert and we specifically ordered the Companion box (took 3 weeks to arrive) of the BECMI serie, the Master came in our hands a lot later, I think at least 3 years later, but we had photocopies of the manuals from who knows where. Wrath of the Immortals was... well, let's call it a treasure finding, by the time we obtained it, we also bought the Rules Cyclopedia, which repacked the first four boxes in a single book (I still have it somewhere together with the colored boxes). Last purchase was the Hollow World, cool concept, never played it much because by the time it came out, AD&D was starting to find its way on our table.

We played that, because that's what we had. Later on we homebrewed a whole new world, I spent months designing it and years playing it. We modified the game to suit us, but honestly we had no real choice. Nowadays the choices are so many, I wish I had the time to play them all in depth because they are all interesting for me.

[Sparky McDibben]

Bad news: All three settings are different versions of the Forgotten Realms, all set during different time periods

Some things, sir, are too far even for blue text! :smalltongue:

For myself, I hope for Ravenloft and Spelljammer. The rest are...eh? I really don't care about Dark Sun, and Dragonlance has always been too romantic for my taste. Rather, I'd hoped for something new. Something a bit like Eberron, that takes the setting implications seriously and uses them to build an entirely new take on D&D. I personally think that Eberron defined 3rd edition, and I'd hoped for something similar with 5th.

[loki_ragnarock]

Likely:

Ravenloft - It's the setting for the published adventure with the widest acclaim. They've already put in the work and built the brand up a bit in this edition, and it was a publisher favorite back in the TSR days.

Spelljammer - It's the meme that's trotted out every time a new setting thing is rumored, and the collective nerdgasm if it turns out to be the case this time would probably bring a smile to the lips of every person working on the project. Different enough from "standard" D&D, has a very loud crowd calling out for it, lots of tie in bits in other adventures. It represents a style that simply hasn't been represented yet while giving a tie in to other products they're putting out.

Dark Sun - It's one of the ones they felt comfortable rereleasing in 4th edition, so it's got a pretty established pedigree as a brand; old, old players ran it in 2e, old players ran it in 4e. Lots of attempts at psionics, a cornerstone of the setting. It represents a style that simply hasn't been represented yet (brutalist hard mode), but has a more complete pedigree than the others.

Unlikely:

Planescape - I want to be wrong, but Ravnica takes up too much of the conceptual space that made Sigil interesting. Further, the tie in to Magic The Gathering means that we're likely to see planeswalking scenarios going in that direction, rather than the City of Doors. Again, I want to be wrong; it's my favorite setting from 2e. Probably because I'm pretentious. But there's not a lot of oxygen there that isn't already in something else's lungs.

Dragonlance - There are legal hurdles to jump over/limbo under with regards to this setting. Mostly a vehicle for publishing fiction, which isn't an angle that WotC really hammers as much these days. Thinking about it, that might actually be an argument for it more than an argument against it if they think it could pry open a neglected line of business... but I suspect they're neglecting fiction for a reason.

Something I'd like to see::
Birthright - It's a different set of circumstances than published settings where you're just an adventurer. Unlikely, as we haven't seen any UA that would support the product. Also, not as popular as the others.
Blackmoor - You want classic? Can you get more classic than Arneson's first role-playing wargame? Unlikely, though; I'm not even sure if they have the rights.

[Fnissalot]

Spelljammer, Planescape, and Domains of Dread (Ravenloft+) seem like the likely candidates to me. 3 Settings that can be used with all the other settings.

Not necessarily the 3 I would like, but it gets harder and harder for me seeing a setting like Dark Sun coming back around without Psionics they can't seem to get right, and not to mention todays game wouldn't deal very well Dark Sun's themes from slavery to the grittiness of the setting. With 5e rules I don't see it recapturing that old familiar feeling of characters dying, starting at level 3, having multiple characters rolled up for the death rate etc. Just my opinion.

There is also that desert part of ravenloft from the computer game Ravenloft Stone Prophet? I have no clue how they are related though.


There is one thing that gives me hope for Dragonlance.

Go back to the PHB. There’s these dark gray sidebars sprinkled throughout.

They mention Deurgar. Death Domain. Oathbreaker.

All things which have seen release.

EXCEPT.

Draconians.

And there is a movie being made. It’s written and directed by John Francés Daley. You know, the kid from Freaks and Geeks? He played Sweets in the FOX show Bones? Also wrote Spider Man: Homecoming and Horrible Bosses, directed Game Night?

There’s a lot of rumors they’re going with Dragonlance as the setting.

And we don't have gully dwarves and could definitely do with more knightly orders? (No one needs kender)

[chainer1216]

Perkins tweeted something along the lines of "anyone who liked Curse Of Strahd will be excited for something I'm working on" a few months ago, I wouldn't be surprised if Ravenloft was one of them.

Spelljammer has come up a few times in modules and that new Buldr's Gate game, so that's another I wouldn't be surprised about seeing.

And if those two end up being true, then the third would most likely be Greyhawk despite how boring thatd be, but there ARE published modules set there.

Everyone wants Darksun but I can guarantee none of you will be happy with Darksun in 5e

[JackPhoenix]

I'm surprised nobody mentioned PoL/Nentir Vale. 4e is better left forgotten, but the setting was pretty good, and it would be a much better choice for a default generic setting than FR is.

[AttilatheYeon]

The more i think about this, the more i get excited. Now i just hope they open up AL play for these new settings like they did for Eberron.

[rooneg]

And we don't have gully dwarves and could definitely do with more knightly orders? (No one needs kender)
I would be incredibly shocked if any modern day take on Dragonlance actually included gully dwarves. They’re a prime candidate for a retcon, especially if a 5e version of Dragonlance was a reimagining of the War of the Lance era stuff, as opposed to just continuing on from where the last published novels left off (which I think is actually relatively likely).

That all said, i still think they won’t do Dragonlance. I love the setting to death, but there are better options from WotC’s point of view.

[Kyutaru]

Bring Dragons back to Dungeons and Dragons! Draconians too, they would wreck people in the higher levels, especially if enchanted. An enchanted Aurak draconian is a powerful dragonkin wizard who explodes in the size and impact of a powerful fireball when slain. Terrifying little beasties, draconians.

[KorvinStarmast]

If you read the timeline, it's just wars and other wars: pretty much every kingdom is bathed in blood for decades - Kind of like Europe's Feudal period from about 500 to 1000 AD and into the high middle ages. I recently read Oman's large compendium on that. He takes things up to just short of the Crusades - it is a the never ending series of dynastic struggles and back stabs (a lot of which are based on the problem of splitting kingdoms among heirs and primogeniture (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primogeniture). That's where the Original (Campaign) D&D conceptual base line comes from - Dark Ages through about the early Crusades era. Modern D&D seems to have taken on a Renaissance sheen that was absent originally. (Though I think that began to start in AD&D as it grew).

I don't think it's a setting worth a damn to be honest, as I said I'm fond of it because it was the first love and I had good memories, but FR, just to mention one, is way better: more details, more interesting characters, more detailed cities, factions, kingdoms, races. We each have differing tastes; I am not quite as fond of FR's Renaissance - feel.
Dark Sun was always mildly appealing to me, I'm not really into post apocalyptic settings ala Mad Max, which probably DS has partially used as a sort of inspirational background. That's part of what I like - we'll see if they have completed their psionics play test, since psionics is integral to Dark Sun.

Perkins tweeted something along the lines of "anyone who liked Curse Of Strahd will be excited for something I'm working on" *shrugs*


Everyone wants Darksun but I can guarantee none of you will be happy with Darksun in 5e (https://forums.giantitp.com/showsinglepost.php?p=24721056&postcount=60) Why do you say that?

[Corsair14]

I think Spelljammer is a given with all the things being added in the last year. Giff, Neogi, Nauteloids(even if they are weird designs).

I would love to see an actual setting for Ravenloft. CoS was nice but it limited things by only having one land and the crazy way they have it connected to the multi-verse.

Planescape is cool if they do it right. I don't see them doing both Planescape and SJ though. Plus you need to get the original artist to come back to get that awesome artwork feel that made PS so unique and the direction Wizards has been going with artwork this edition makes me think they wont spring for anything more than a talented 6th grader to do the artwork.

Dark Sun, as much as I wish they would update it, there are several reasons I think they wont. The environment will offend too many thin skinned people who don't understand its fictional in the current environment. Further similar to my comment on planescape, the artwork by Brom was one of the things that made Dark Sun stand out amid all the other settings of the time. Wizards wont do the art justice and wont pay someone like Brom to come back and re do it. I think they will simply update the psionics stuff and let us do it ourselves. Hopefully the Tasha's book has an extensive Wild Talents section.

I would not be surprised to see a new campaign world come out with all their new and happy inclusive races singing kumbaya around the campfire.

Mysteria would be awesome but I don't see it.
Dragonlance with its myriad of races and grand war theme would be amazing. But since its armies of darkness versus armies of light I don't think that Wizards will go for it since someone has to be the bad guys.

Whatever it is, hopefully they will bring back some of the artists of old and get rid of this crap water color finger painting nonsense they have been doing for awhile.

[KorvinStarmast]

I think Spelljammer is a given I guess that would meld with plane shifts and such ...

Planescape is cool if they do it right. I don't see them doing both Planescape and SJ though.
Hmm, makes sense. Agree on the artwork bit.

Dark Sun, as much as I wish they would update it, there are several reasons I think they wont. The environment will offend too many thin skinned people who don't understand its fictional in the current environment. Further similar to my comment on planescape, the artwork by Brom was one of the things that made Dark Sun stand out amid all the other settings of the time. Wizards wont do the art justice and wont pay someone like Brom to come back and re do it. I hope you are not correct, but I can see why you may be right.

Dragonlance ... someone has to be the bad guys. That, and (censored) Kender. Please, no. Just no.

[Amechra]

I kinda want to see them release a 5e Dark Sun, because I can't see it as anything other than a trainwreck. Dark Sun is the classic D&D setting that deviates the most from Standard D&D Tropes, which is not going to mix well with 5e's stubborn insistence on just refluffing the classes and races that are in the core instead of adding new player-facing subsystems.

[Joe the Rat]

Planescape OR Spelljammer. Adding two world-hopper settings at the same time seems unlikely. With MTG already on deck as "Prime-hopping," Spelljammer could be redundant. or complimentary.

Ravenloft does have a high probability, given the warm reception for Old Strahd. That or Perkins was involved in Frostmaiden. The downside is that the Dimension o' Dread played heavily on Bad Dudes from Many Worlds. It could flow from any other 'hopper setting, though.



Bad news: All three settings are different versions of the Forgotten Realms, all set during different time periods

Sarcasm aside, I would love a Timeline/Millenium setting - one world, multiple Epochs (possibly including alternate futures), and time travel-as-world-hopping. Less Primer and Tenet, more Dr. Who and Chrono Trigger.

[TigerT20]

Noone sees to have mentioned the Borderlands. Are they their own setting, or are they p[art of one of the others? My pre 5e lore is hazy at best

[Wildstag]

If you mean the Border Kingdoms, they are part of the Forgotten Realms, I found them once upon a time on the archives. I don't know about a separate setting called the "Borderlands" though.

P.S. Found them. Here are the Border Kingdoms. (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/archfr/frbk)

[TigerT20]

If you mean the Border Kingdoms, they are part of the Forgotten Realms, I found them once upon a time on the archives. I don't know about a separate setting called the "Borderlands" though.

P.S. Found them. Here are the Border Kingdoms. (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/archfr/frbk)

It's the one from the popular 'Keep on the Borderlands' adventure. I think there have been like 10 remakes of it?

[Falconcry]

With the Green Ronin Publishing site having scrubbed every mention of the Tal’dorei Campaign Guide is it possible that Hasbro threw some money at them to bring Matt and Joey’s work under the proper WotC banner? There are lots of new critters every year.

[ProsecutorGodot]

With the Green Ronin Publishing site having scrubbed every mention of the Tal’dorei Campaign Guide is it possible that Hasbro threw some money at them to bring Matt and Joey’s work under the proper WotC banner? There are lots of new critters every year.

Possible, though I doubt Tal'dorei falls under "classic setting"

Could just be another setting book, bringing back old settings doesn't mean they can't expand on current ones.

[jaappleton]

With the Green Ronin Publishing site having scrubbed every mention of the Tal’dorei Campaign Guide is it possible that Hasbro threw some money at them to bring Matt and Joey’s work under the proper WotC banner? There are lots of new critters every year.

Interesting.... I didn’t know about that.

[Mikal]

It's the one from the popular 'Keep on the Borderlands' adventure. I think there have been like 10 remakes of it?

Keep on the borderlands is set in mystara which would be an interesting setting. Lots of areas to explore. The Known World, the Hollow World, the Savage Coast, even Blackmoor.

[KorvinStarmast]

Keep on the borderlands is set in mystara which would be an interesting setting. Lots of areas to explore. The Known World, the Hollow World, the Savage Coast, even Blackmoor. It was published before Mystara became canon IIRC. :smallwink:
In Greyhawk (which is where we played our AD&D in 1981) I think it was either near the Duchy of Ernst or somewhere on the eastern borders in Ulek.

Our AD&D 1e DM put it on the western Edge of the Pomarj, and hat's a long time before the War of Ashes ... (No Orchish Empire on Wooly Bay at that point).

[Mikal]

It was published before Mystara became canon IIRC. :smallwink:
In Greyhawk (which is where we played our AD&D in 1981) I think it was either near the Duchy of Ernst or somewhere on the eastern borders in Ulek.

Yes, but it was later revised to be part of Mystara. The original version was NOT part of Greyhawk, it was setting agnostic.
It was added to Mystara when The Grand Duchy of Karameikos supplement was published. So any actual references to it after the fact, unless retconned, would be Mystara, not Greyhawk.

It's easy to to get tripped up on that though, since, like you said, it came out BEFORE Mystara became an official setting.

[Yakmala]

Personally, I'd be happy with more source books for Faerun or Toril. Maybe the eastern lands of Kara-Tur, or the dragon empires of Laerakond.

But if we are going old school, then let's go really old school and have a 5e source book for Blackmoor.

[MaxWilson]

Bring Dragons back to Dungeons and Dragons! Draconians too, they would wreck people in the higher levels, especially if enchanted. An enchanted Aurak draconian is a powerful dragonkin wizard who explodes in the size and impact of a powerful fireball when slain. Terrifying little beasties, draconians.

That is terrifying in an edition where a 10d6 Fireball has a good chance of killing a 20th level wizard (35 HP). But 5E is the edition where Fireballs are 8d6 and 20th level wizards have 100+ HP plus even more temp HP, and they don't die 0 at HP anyway. 5E is not a good edition for damage to be terrifying. :(

[KorvinStarmast]

Yes, but it was later revised to be part of Mystara. The original version was NOT part of Greyhawk, it was setting agnostic. While it was originally setting agnostic, yes, there was later material (perhaps in Dragon Mab?) that placed it in a certain locale in Greyhawk, which given that Gary was a driving influence behind it ... .. but memory is hazy. (For my money, as good and as fun as it was, the previous included module for BX was a far better introductory module .... )

It was added to Mystara when The Grand Duchy of Karameikos supplement was published. That's a kind of a retcon, though, if it was originally intended to fit anywhere - but it sure fits Mystara like a glove since its mechanics are Basic (Moldvay) or B/X, not AD&D 1e.

So any actual references to it after the fact, unless retconned, would be Mystara, not Greyhawk. Don't think so. I believe you are making some unwarranted assumptions, but, unless I can dig up those old Dragon mag bits, I am happy to leave it retconned as located somewhere in Mystara. And, it surely fits the B/X format beautifully.
EDIT: I was right. He originally suggested that it would make sense to be in the Pomarj for WoG adaptations

March 2001
Q: "Was the Keep on the Borderlands originally in the World of Greyhawk and if so where did you place it in your campaign?
A: "KotB was not set on Oerth, it was just a free-form locale that any DM could fit into his campaign world. Likely it would be okay on the border of the Pomarj, though." (email to Gene Weigel, quoted in Dragonsfoot forum post in 2003) So there ya go, memory not totally shot.

It's easy to to get tripped up on that though, since, like you said, it came out BEFORE Mystara became an official setting. Indeed it did, and nobody got tripped up.
It wasn't until some years later that anyone started playing the 'oh, that's canon' game with D&D stuff ... I think that would be AD&D 2e era or maybe later. Placing the G1, 2, and 3 in various mountians in the world of Greyhawk was 'canon' before B/X came out, but those were explicitly AD&D 1e modules.

Hmmm, something about the AD&D 1e FR era, and the problem with continuity issues when both books and video games came out that had to account for edition changes like AD&D 2e. (SSI games, anybody?)

[JadedDM]

Let's not get too excited. I still remember last time they announced they were going to introduce a new setting. Everyone was like, "Dark Sun? Ravenloft? Spelljammer? Planescape?" Then it turned out to be...Magic the Gathering. So...yeah.

Anyway, the only prediction I'll make is that it absolutely will NOT be Dragonlance. For whatever reason, WotC seems to abhor that setting. They seriously gave Magic the Gathering preference over it. I mean, come on! It was one of the Big Three once upon a time. The Big Three!

:smallfrown:

(No offense to fans of MtG, by the way. I'm just a bitter Dragonlance fan who has waited around 12 years for something, anything new.)

[MrStabby]

I actually wouldn't mind more mtg stuff.

An MTG world needs/will almost certainly try and include:

Named heroes and villans

Factions with different agendas that bring them into conflict

Classical fantasy elements

A strong world theme that builds an aesthetic

Geographically distinct locations

Creatures of a huge variety of power levels


All of which are things that I think would make a great D&D setting as well. It isn't like there is really much of a tension between between the needs of the two games systems when it comes to the setting. If WotC can share development over two different products and produce a richer more interesting and fleshed out world as a result, then I am all for that.

[FrancisBean]

Obviously I'm hoping for Spelljammer, and wouldn't mind a Sigil update.... But there's a certain irreverant part of me which wants a whole new setting. Something we could title.... Rise of the Grung! :smallbiggrin:

[Satori01]

5E is not a good edition for damage to be terrifying. :(

Swap in levels of Exhaustion and people in 5e will soil themselves. ;)

An Aurak is a CR 11 creature at most. A 16d6 Death Throes with a 20' diameter range is still 56 points of damage, which is inline with the damage from a Tier 3 Dangerous Trap.

A 56 point death inferno is not negligible, even for 5e.

Dragonlance should never be a setting book, it needs to be an adventure path, with 2 separate books. 1-11/ 11-20th.
Done....

Dark Sun was an ok D&D setting....but it would make a great Magic the Gathering/D&D crossover MtG set....

Illithids in Space, is a theme in two separate adventures....Spelljammer anyone?

[opaopajr]

Pelinore, Jakandor, and Red Steel? :smallsmile:

[JackPhoenix]

Anyway, the only prediction I'll make is that it absolutely will NOT be Dragonlance. For whatever reason, WotC seems to abhor that setting. They seriously gave Magic the Gathering preference over it. I mean, come on! It was one of the Big Three once upon a time. The Big Three!

(No offense to fans of MtG, by the way. I'm just a bitter Dragonlance fan who has waited around 12 years for something, anything new.)

Didn't WotC lost the Dragonlance IP, or do I remember that wrong?

[JadedDM]

Not that I've heard of. Lost it to who?

[RossN]

Pelinore, Jakandor, and Red Steel? :smallsmile:

I know this sarcasm but I genuinely think Jakandor was a neat setting. It has a strong vibe, an interesting shades of grey feel, barbarians, not-necessarily evil necromancers, airships and post-apocolyptic ruins. :smallcool:

I also like Tale of the Comet (https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/17106/Tale-of-the-Comet-2e) it's halfsister under the Odyssey line.


Let's not get too excited. I still remember last time they announced they were going to introduce a new setting. Everyone was like, "Dark Sun? Ravenloft? Spelljammer? Planescape?" Then it turned out to be...Magic the Gathering. So...yeah.

Anyway, the only prediction I'll make is that it absolutely will NOT be Dragonlance. For whatever reason, WotC seems to abhor that setting. They seriously gave Magic the Gathering preference over it. I mean, come on! It was one of the Big Three once upon a time. The Big Three!

:smallfrown:

(No offense to fans of MtG, by the way. I'm just a bitter Dragonlance fan who has waited around 12 years for something, anything new.)

I feel your pain as a fellow Dragonlance fan. :smallfrown:

[rooneg]

Didn't WotC lost the Dragonlance IP, or do I remember that wrong?

They licensed it to Margaret Weis during the 3e days (most of the 3e Dragonlance books were from her company), but as far as I know WotC still owns it.

[Corsair14]

Swap in levels of Exhaustion and people in 5e will soil themselves. ;)


Dragonlance should never be a setting book, it needs to be an adventure path, with 2 separate books. 1-11/ 11-20th.
Done....


See I disagree, all the different available races, divergent classes and different classes(for example I would have Squire as a class with the three orders as archtypes), world history, maps, factions, creatures etc etc. It needs its own setting book with a second adventure path book.

[Satori01]

So Krynn should get treatment akin to the level the Forgotten Realms gets?

I'm not sure I agree with that.

Eberron is a better fit for 5e, then it ever was for 3e.

The races of Krynn are pretty much covered already. Multiple varieties of elves. Check
Halflings are Kender, Dwarves are Dwarves...Duergar are a PC race.
Half-Elves are Half-Elves, Minotaurs are Minotaurs...and Dragonborn are banned.

Firbolgs can be the race of good magical ogres.

Knights of Solamnia are a faction and a Subclass available to Fighters, Paladins and Rangers.

[Corsair14]

Gotta disagree especially on the Knights as all three orders are varied enough to be archetypes of their own from a squire class although I guess you could just have fighters. To me there would be a lot of restrictions. Paladins and monks wouldnt exist. This all of course is if we are keeping to as close to the source as possible and not just making a more war torn skin for FR. Each world should be unique and not just a skin over. Doing otherwise would be a lazy way of doing it and cheating the players and DM of such a rich and different world.

There are what a dozen different draconian races counting the Noble varieties that I would make available. Tinker gnomes, gully dwarves, kender(I would mke them a halfing subrace.

The magic using classes would have to be refined as well to the three schools. Not sure if sorcerers and warlocks fit the setting.

[Luccan]

Here's the thing, Krynn just getting a couple adventure paths would, I think, work against it, not for it. Because few who started playing D&D since 5e came out are likely to be familiar with the setting and anyone who loves it has already played through its rigid campaign several times already. I'm not personally a huge fan of Dragonlance (I mostly know it through D&D cultural osmosis), but I can say I'd be way more interested in a fleshed out setting than just an adventure. And nothing I've heard about playing the war of the lance story in previous editions sounds particularly fun. A setting book will win far more fans than a railroad-y adventure.

[JadedDM]

Why does everyone keep saying Dragonlance is just War of the Lance and nothing else? War of the Lance was set in 351 AC. The setting continued on past that point to nearly a hundred years later. There is so much history and worldbuilding there.

[rooneg]

Why does everyone keep saying Dragonlance is just War of the Lance and nothing else? War of the Lance was set in 351 AC. The setting continued on past that point to nearly a hundred years later. There is so much history and worldbuilding there.

Honestly, for me that’s actually a problem. The War of the Lance is (to me anyway) the iconic story of the Dragonlance world, and when I’ve played games set there we’ve always set them either during or soon after the war. An elaborate history of what follows seems to limit options. I mean obviously it’s your game and to a degree nothing limits your options, you can just change it, but personally I feel like there’s a balance between how much you want to have fleshed out and how much you want to leave unclear, both in the detail of your setting and in the amount of the timeline that’s well established. It’s part of why if they did revisit Krynn I’d like it to be a reimagining of the War of the Lance and not just a “and now we shall document the three or four distinct eras of history that have previously been explored in great detail” like what was done in the 3e books.

[Temperjoke]

Dragonlance almost has too much history at this point to start releasing stuff for 5e, at least in my opinion. As for Ravenloft, my problem is that to me Ravenloft = Curse of Strahd, even though at some level I recognize it's not.

Does MtG have any new expansions/areas coming out within the next year? That could be one of the new settings, as they seem to be able to produce those easily enough, since there isn't nearly as much history and baggage compared to the d&d properties.

[loki_ragnarock]

Eberron is a better fit for 5e, then it ever was for 3e.

Respectfully, I disagree; it was a setting that was put together with 3e mechanics taken as the fundamental driver of the assumptions for the world.

It was kind of brilliant that way. In 5e it's just another setting.

[Luccan]

Why does everyone keep saying Dragonlance is just War of the Lance and nothing else? War of the Lance was set in 351 AC. The setting continued on past that point to nearly a hundred years later. There is so much history and worldbuilding there.

I mean, the argument was it just needed an adventure path, so I assumed the poster meant the single most famous part of the entire setting, but maybe they didn't. Either way, I agree that there's enough to do something other than war of the lance, but TBH I don't see how that could be accomplished to any useful degree outside a setting book that actually explains the lore of the setting.

[Satori01]

Respectfully, I disagree; it was a setting that was put together with 3e mechanics taken as the fundamental driver of the assumptions for the world.

It was kind of brilliant that way. In 5e it's just another setting.

Except it was anything but brilliant. The mythos, the world building is great..but Dragonmarks requiring feats..in a system that notoriously did not give enough of them..meant Dragonmark characters were often weaker then non-dragonmarked builds...which is exactly contrary to the thematic intent.

[Xervous]

Except it was anything but brilliant. The mythos, the world building is great..but Dragonmarks requiring feats..in a system that notoriously did not give enough of them..meant Dragonmark characters were often weaker then non-dragonmarked builds...which is exactly contrary to the thematic intent.

My takeaway on dragonmarks isn’t that they’re an extra level of Saiyan power as much as they’re a natural aptitude for something key parts of the economic system is structured around, not to mention potential tie ins on family benefits.

[KorvinStarmast]

Why does everyone keep saying Dragonlance is just War of the Lance and nothing else? War of the Lance was set in 351 AC. The novels were of uneven quality, and by the time the war of the lance was over I was fed up with Krynn. For good. I still have the four original modules, three of them still in the plastic wrap. Krynn was a fine way to fuse book sales with RPG module sales. For a while.

Respectfully, I disagree; it was a setting that was put together with 3e mechanics taken as the fundamental driver of the assumptions for the world. Which IME is both a strength and a weakness of the setting. (The port into 5e was uneven, for all that I'd like to play in a campaign set only in Eberron. I think it has a neat feel to it).

[Tawmis]

It's without a doubt - if we suspect - they're grabbing "classic" slots - Ravenloft and Spelljammer. They already have Ravenloft references. They recently did Airships and all of that, so the next evolution is Spelljammer. For a third, no idea.

But for those slamming on Dragonlance - yes, it would take some work.
Because of how Wizards work (three orders), and the Towers.
Yes, it would take some work because of the three orders of the Knights.

But too much history? Why not just have a few pages that recap the point of history of Dragonlance? War of the Lance? Or post?
Allow the party to have adventures before, during, after, or completely divergent times?
Everyone's so focused on it's a limited idea. If that's your concern - you don't fully understand D&D.

As for Dragonborn being banished as an idea, why not refluff them as Draconians? Especially if it's adventures post the wars. Draconians who were born into this world, and now with the war over, don't have a place, so they take up adventuring.

Something no one has mentioned, as a slot - Star Frontiers, to compete with the Star Wars type games. WotC still owns it, and I'd love to see it. But it will probably never see the light of day, or just be a divergent part of Spelljammer.

[Willie the Duck]

Kind of like Europe's Feudal period from about 500 to 1000 AD and into the high middle ages. I recently read Oman's large compendium on that. He takes things up to just short of the Crusades - it is a the never ending series of dynastic struggles and back stabs (a lot of which are based on the problem of splitting kingdoms among heirs and primogeniture (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primogeniture). That's where the Original (Campaign) D&D conceptual base line comes from - Dark Ages through about the early Crusades era. Modern D&D seems to have taken on a Renaissance sheen that was absent originally. (Though I think that began to start in AD&D as it grew).


Do you have a link or ISBN for that? It sounds like a good read.
As to D&D based on DA-early Crusade, it's always been awfully mixed (aside from it also always having been the Wild West with a medieval overlay) -- the game always had plate armor and war hammers and crossbows and other things that really gained traction post 1000 AD, yet it certainly did have a bit of pre-renaissance polish (something that 2e really tried to infuse into it, sliding into the Romanticism art interpretation of medieval times). I always took early D&D to be someone from the 3th centuries depiction of the 8th century -- King Arthur behaves like a Dark Ages King, but he wears modern (for then) armor.


While it was originally setting agnostic, yes, there was later material (perhaps in Dragon Mab?) that placed it in a certain locale in Greyhawk, which given that Gary was a driving influence behind it ... .. but memory is hazy. (For my money, as good and as fun as it was, the previous included module for BX was a far better introductory module .... )
That's a kind of a retcon, though, if it was originally intended to fit anywhere - but it sure fits Mystara like a glove since its mechanics are Basic (Moldvay) or B/X, not AD&D 1e.
Don't think so. I believe you are making some unwarranted assumptions, but, unless I can dig up those old Dragon mag bits, I am happy to leave it retconned as located somewhere in Mystara. And, it surely fits the B/X format beautifully.
EDIT: I was right. He originally suggested that it would make sense to be in the Pomarj for WoG adaptations So there ya go, memory not totally shot.
Indeed it did, and nobody got tripped up.
It wasn't until some years later that anyone started playing the 'oh, that's canon' game with D&D stuff ... I think that would be AD&D 2e era or maybe later. Placing the G1, 2, and 3 in various mountians in the world of Greyhawk was 'canon' before B/X came out, but those were explicitly AD&D 1e modules.

The whole concept of cannon and splitting things into oD&D/B/BX/BECMI is all retroactive by the fan community. To TSR, D&D was whichever game was currently in print and don't you want to buy it? AD&D was distinct for legal reasons, so that was a delineation they drew as well. I think Gary ceded KotB to the basic/classic line, since that's where it started, and since he wanted Greyhawk to be AD&D, it didn't migrate.

Mystara in general is itself a case of retroactive creation of canon. Up until its migration to AD&D 2e it was merely 'the Known World' which was what was at the top of maps in BX, IIRC. So was KotB part of Mystara? Well, KotB was part of a default implied setting which later we were told was Mystara, so take your pick. Certainly the 'Known World' as communicated in BX or KotB is very very different from the immense-metaplot kingdoms defined in the Gazatteers (or the gonzo madness of the Creature Crucibles and Bruce Heard's Princess Ark articles in Dragon). I can absolutely see someone liking one version and not the other.

[t209]

I do hope there's a chance for Darksun considering all the clamouring I hear for it. But with my barest surface level understanding of some of the more common themes in Darksun, and the current ... climate ... of the modern day, I think that one might be shelved for a bit longer :smallfrown:
On the other hand, they can give a somewhat hopeful option.
I mean you can run Dark Sun as Fallout, which itself is bleak and cynical but a heroic character with right choices can make a difference even they are canon.
Helping a farming village, stopping bandits, and even help restore civilization.

Dark Sun, as much as I wish they would update it, there are several reasons I think they wont. The environment will offend too many thin skinned people who don't understand its fictional in the current environment. Further similar to my comment on planescape, the artwork by Brom was one of the things that made Dark Sun stand out amid all the other settings of the time. Wizards wont do the art justice and wont pay someone like Brom to come back and re do it. I think they will simply update the psionics stuff and let us do it ourselves. Hopefully the Tasha's book has an extensive Wild Talents section.
Well, the dress for Fictional environment doesn’t seem right either.
Have they heard about “cover everybody with light clothes or you will get heatstroke” and their bikini mostly suited for Jungle, which Dark Sun don’t have except dwellings of cannibal halflings.
Though an obscure 4E Dark Sun comic do have head coverings and full covered light clothes for wanderers (humans mostly, Muls mostly go Barbarian clothings because heat resilience).

[loki_ragnarock]

Well, the dress for Fictional environment doesn’t seem right either.
Have they heard about “cover everybody with light clothes or you will get heatstroke” and their bikini mostly suited for Jungle, which Dark Sun don’t have except dwellings of cannibal halflings.
Though an obscure 4E Dark Sun comic do have head coverings and full covered light clothes for wanderers (humans mostly, Muls mostly go Barbarian clothings because heat resilience).

People not having much in the way of clothes was sort of a consequence of being extremely resource scarce. Sure, you could cover your skin, but being able to afford the cloth or leather to do so means you're rich. And if you're rich, that means other people target you because you have something they want/need. And because you spent those ceramics on cloth instead of an obsidian gythka they'll probably succeed in murdering and robbing you of your fine torso coverings. Which is basically fine since you've got two backup characters.

People wearing next to nothing is sort of baked into the setting.

[zinycor]

I do hope there's a chance for Darksun considering all the clamouring I hear for it. But with my barest surface level understanding of some of the more common themes in Darksun, and the current ... climate ... of the modern day, I think that one might be shelved for a bit longer :smallfrown:


If Hell was appropiatte to be printed, I don't think Dark Sun would be a problem.

[Nagog]

Thank goodness it's a return to D&D worlds. I'm sick of the MtG settings. Having older books and adventures and lore to reference in the scope of D&D will be a fantastic update to this edition.

[PhoenixPhyre]

Thank goodness it's a return to D&D worlds. I'm sick of the MtG settings. Having older books and adventures and lore to reference in the scope of D&D will be a fantastic update to this edition.

Even though I'm fully committed to my own setting and am highly unlikely to purchase or use any other, I agree. I had even less interest in the MtG settings than I did in eberron. The Exandria one wasn't ever really on my radar, because CR isn't my thing at all.

[t209]

People not having much in the way of clothes was sort of a consequence of being extremely resource scarce. Sure, you could cover your skin, but being able to afford the cloth or leather to do so means you're rich. And if you're rich, that means other people target you because you have something they want/need. And because you spent those ceramics on cloth instead of an obsidian gythka they'll probably succeed in murdering and robbing you of your fine torso coverings. Which is basically fine since you've got two backup characters.

People wearing next to nothing is sort of baked into the setting.
Or as 1d4chan pointed out,
“ A tougher plot hole to work out is, how has no one figured out that full body robes are much better protection in the desert than going borderline-naked? Do the locals all have inherited UV protection? Does the sun not shine in the UV spectrum so sunstroke isn’t a thing?”
On the other hand, they can go with white body paint and black eye screen like Warboys from Mad Max: Fury Road, which many suggested that it was protect from sunlight while using less clothes in resource scarce society in addition to devotion to emulate similarly painted Immortan Joe.

[Corsair14]

One problem with clothes being so rare is farm land is really limited. So do you plant food so people can eat or do you plant cotton or flax. Sheep arent a thing. I imagine there could be a way to get silk from spiders or worms but it would be very expensive. Thus we are left with leather bikinis and shell armor

[t209]

One problem with clothes being so rare is farm land is really limited. So do you plant food so people can eat or do you plant cotton or flax. Sheep arent a thing. I imagine there could be a way to get silk from spiders or worms but it would be very expensive. Thus we are left with leather bikinis and shell armor

Just that the idea of fur bikini in desert wasteland of Athas has been mocked a lot, especially in 1d4chan and more fitting in humid environment like Tropics.
But I think white paint as sunscreen can be done ala War Boys.

[diplomancer]

I love Dragonlance. I wish it was the main "classic fantasy" setting instead of Forgotten Realms (which I find mostly bland and uninteresting). That said, FR IS the main setting, and Dragonlance occupies a somewhat similar niche, as do, to some extent, Greyhawk and Mystara. So yes, I'd expect Dark Sun, Ravenloft and Planescape.

[rlc]

I just found this article (https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5f6a1b4fc5b6968b276fcc00/amp), which either makes my earlier guess of Kara-Tur more or less likely to be correct, depending on your reading of it.

[t209]

I just found this article (https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5f6a1b4fc5b6968b276fcc00/amp), which either makes my earlier guess of Kara-Tur more or less likely to be correct, depending on your reading of it.
Well, I did read Oriental Adventures and even tried looking at a forum with a more neutral tone, i.e- their youtube podcasts' this is offensive and lack of acknowledgment on the Japanese playtesters or the sources at the end of the book (assuming how "last moment" were they though). Though it did have "Chad L5R vs. Virgin OA" tone.
https://forum.rpg.net/index.php?threads/lets-read-oriental-adventures-1e.768413/
They do agree that it is somewhat too much padding, human-centric, and seems to conflate ninja weapons as dishonorable that felt like "Samurai don't use firearms" or ignoring concepts like circumstances or desperation. Not something that might work in Shadow of Tsushima or Seven Samurai campaign, where the main theme being a deconstruction of Bushido Honor (Jin having to use guerilla tactics, and Seven Samurai having one dressing up as a monk to save a child to burning down a bathhouse to flush out raiders).
Just felt like "fantasy as written by weeaboo" but :smalltongue: mostly beacause we have Anime and Avatar the Last Airbender that set a rather high bar compared to OA and even Forgotten Realm's Kara-Tur (To be honest, they did cover and differentiate China even if I found the attempt to divide china and japan of different timeline into two sets of good and evil countries to be frustrating along with Korea being...mostly a sidenote at best but not everyone is going to know Gat-wearing Koryo warrior).

[PhoenixPhyre]

I couldn't care less about political subtext, but I strongly don't want a "fantasy version of <earth region/culture>" setting. Because I want to see different things than exist in real life. I don't want expies. I don't want cultures based on human ones other than the necessary shared elements (because humans are writing them). I don't want homages, deconstructions, or commentary. Give me a world that could exist on its own, one where the authors can say with full sincerity "this is a work of fiction. Any resemblance to real people, nations, events, or ideas is accidental and can be ignored."

Mainly because copying real stuff wholesale (including real myths and legends) is boring. Explore something new, something different. And if you can't find anything new or different to do, at least have the courtesy of mixing up the things you yoink from other places, not just dropping a copy down in as if it's your own.

I want settings that break the "rules". That take one of the core assumptions the DMG talks about and shoves the dial the other way and then explores the consequences. Say one that turns magic down to a minimum . Or turns it way up. Or one where monsters are only now coming back. Or a world that is new, without the kilo-years of fallen empires. Etc.

/rant.

[KorvinStarmast]

Dark Sun was an ok D&D setting....but it would make a great Magic the Gathering/D&D crossover MtG set.... It's people like you what cause unrest! (Old John Cleese line in Monty Python) Please, not.
Red Steel? :smallsmile: Well, why not? :smallcool: Swashbuckling seems to be popular.

Do you have a link or ISBN for that? It sounds like a good read.
PM sent

I think Gary ceded KotB to the basic/classic line, since that's where it started, and since he wanted Greyhawk to be AD&D, it didn't migrate. The folks at Canonfire have it somewhere near Ulek or north of there ... but I am not sure how that came about.
Thank goodness it's a return to D&D worlds. I'm sick of the MtG settings. Having older books and adventures and lore to reference in the scope of D&D will be a fantastic update to this edition. we have an accord. :smallsmile:
Give me a world that could exist on its own, one where the authors can say with full sincerity "this is a work of fiction. Any resemblance to real people, nations, events, or ideas is accidental and can be ignored." The World of Greyhawk is that, and it has beholders and mind flayers who are, like owlbears and rust monsters, unique in their contribution to the world's texture. :smallsmile:

[t209]

I couldn't care less about political subtext, but I strongly don't want a "fantasy version of <earth region/culture>" setting. Because I want to see different things than exist in real life. I don't want expies. I don't want cultures based on human ones other than the necessary shared elements (because humans are writing them). I don't want homages, deconstructions, or commentary. Give me a world that could exist on its own, one where the authors can say with full sincerity "this is a work of fiction. Any resemblance to real people, nations, events, or ideas is accidental and can be ignored."

Mainly because copying real stuff wholesale (including real myths and legends) is boring. Explore something new, something different. And if you can't find anything new or different to do, at least have the courtesy of mixing up the things you yoink from other places, not just dropping a copy down in as if it's your own.

I want settings that break the "rules". That take one of the core assumptions the DMG talks about and shoves the dial the other way and then explores the consequences. Say one that turns magic down to a minimum . Or turns it way up. Or one where monsters are only now coming back. Or a world that is new, without the kilo-years of fallen empires. Etc.

/rant.

Well, Avatar The Last Airbender did this, and it is one of the beloved franchises.
But it does have brownie point for standing on its own, like Earth Bender having clay and earthen cities while Waterbenders have igloo cities.

[PhoenixPhyre]

Well, Avatar The Last Airbender did this, and it is one of the beloved franchises.
But it does have brownie point for standing on its own, like Earth Bender having clay and earthen cities while Waterbenders have igloo cities.

Honestly, I don't find ATLA's worldbuilding anything special. Yeah, it's not horrible. But it's so darn cliche. Tyrannical fire. "Wise" water. Freedom-loving air. Stolid, unbending earth. Plus the whole mono-culture things. The world, as it stands, makes very little sense.

But what makes it much loved was the characters and the stories set in it. You can have great stories set in crappy worlds. You can have great worlds with crappy stories. And everywhere in between. But D&D setting designers aren't writing stories. That's up to us. They're giving us a canvas on which to draw, a toolbox and palette to make our own stories (if you'll pardon the mixed metaphor). And I want ones that stretch my imagination, point it to new places. Not tread the same bloodstained historical/mythological ground over and over.

----------

Going beyond that, I think that trying to republish old settings is like trying to capture lightning in a bottle. Just like the books you read/stories you watched as a kid rarely hold up to later inspection (because, if nothing else, your own tastes have changed), counting on the nostalgia of grognards is a losing proposition.

I played mostly with new players. Most of which had never read any fantasy. Some had watched anime. Others might have watched one of the LotR movies, but no more than just in passing. Even the older ones. One person only ever read anything D&D related because we were going to start playing. Dragonlance, Dark Sun, Planescape, Spelljammer, Kara Tur--none of these resonate with them at all. Their prior incarnations are meaningless to them one way or another.

On the flip side, the grognards are looking back through perceptions skewed by time. They remember the joy (or pain) of the settings way back then and not the rest of everything. That's normal human nature. And so when these new/old settings don't measure up to their airbrushed memories, a lot of them will start slamming the settings as disappointments. It happens every time something is "rebooted".

[Luccan]

Going beyond that, I think that trying to republish old settings is like trying to capture lightning in a bottle. Just like the books you read/stories you watched as a kid rarely hold up to later inspection (because, if nothing else, your own tastes have changed), counting on the nostalgia of grognards is a losing proposition.

I played mostly with new players. Most of which had never read any fantasy. Some had watched anime. Others might have watched one of the LotR movies, but no more than just in passing. Even the older ones. One person only ever read anything D&D related because we were going to start playing. Dragonlance, Dark Sun, Planescape, Spelljammer, Kara Tur--none of these resonate with them at all. Their prior incarnations are meaningless to them one way or another.

On the flip side, the grognards are looking back through perceptions skewed by time. They remember the joy (or pain) of the settings way back then and not the rest of everything. That's normal human nature. And so when these new/old settings don't measure up to their airbrushed memories, a lot of them will start slamming the settings as disappointments. It happens every time something is "rebooted".

I don't know about this. The main camp I've seen complain about Eberron in 5e, for instance, either never liked it in 3rd edition or are newer folks who equally agree that it's somehow "wrong" for D&D. I don't think I've seen any old fans of the setting complain about its introduction in 5e. Similarly, while I think I've seen some debate about whether Curse of Strahd is a good adventure or not, none of those complaints have claimed Ravenloft itself as an issue. The complaints about Forgotten Realms, meanwhile, is ranges from any FR is bad (from people who already disliked the setting) to there not being enough material expanding on the setting for 5e. Very few complaints that fans of the setting no longer like it. And at least in that case it can be blamed on how hard WotC tends to push FR above everything else. I haven't heard much about Ghosts of Saltmarsh, but what I have heard doesn't really address Greyhawk at all, so it's certainly lacking in any claims that the setting is an issue

And if new players don't care then unless your suggestion is to use popular settings from other media using old settings seems fine. Might as well give people what they're asking for.

[Waazraath]

I don't know about this. The main camp I've seen complain about Eberron in 5e, for instance, either never liked it in 3rd edition or are newer folks who equally agree that it's somehow "wrong" for D&D. I don't think I've seen any old fans of the setting complain about its introduction in 5e. Similarly, while I think I've seen some debate about whether Curse of Strahd is a good adventure or not, none of those complaints have claimed Ravenloft itself as an issue. The complaints about Forgotten Realms, meanwhile, is ranges from any FR is bad (from people who already disliked the setting) to there not being enough material expanding on the setting for 5e. Very few complaints that fans of the setting no longer like it. And at least in that case it can be blamed on how hard WotC tends to push FR above everything else. I haven't heard much about Ghosts of Saltmarsh, but what I have heard doesn't really address Greyhawk at all, so it's certainly lacking in any claims that the setting is an issue

And if new players don't care then unless your suggestion is to use popular settings from other media using old settings seems fine. Might as well give people what they're asking for.

It really depends. I think the examples you mention are in line with what I've seen, but I've also seen a lot of anger on 4e's take on Forgotten Realms. I do agree that there's no harm in ressurrecting old settings, when it pleases the old and it doesn't matter for the new. Then again, I wouldn't mind either if they made new, really good setting specifically for 5e; we have a few attempts (Ravnica, Theros, Wildemount), but all of those aren't really settings, just 1 book, and while I don't know the last one, from what I've read so far on how people like them I don't think one of them should be made '5e's setting'.

[JackPhoenix]

It really depends. I think the examples you mention are in line with what I've seen, but I've also seen a lot of anger on 4e's take on Forgotten Realms. I do agree that there's no harm in ressurrecting old settings, when it pleases the old and it doesn't matter for the new. Then again, I wouldn't mind either if they made new, really good setting specifically for 5e; we have a few attempts (Ravnica, Theros, Wildemount), but all of those aren't really settings, just 1 book, and while I don't know the last one, from what I've read so far on how people like them I don't think one of them should be made '5e's setting'.

The first two, especially Ravnica, also don't work in 5e, because it's a setting from an entirely different game based on different premises. That's worse than the global catastrophes that come to FR because someone feels the need to turn the setting upside down every time an edition changes.

[zinycor]

The first two, especially Ravnica, also don't work in 5e, because it's a setting from an entirely different game based on different premises. That's worse than the global catastrophes that come to FR because someone feels the need to turn the setting upside down every time an edition changes.

I love the Ravnica setting. Is so much fun.

[Arkhios]

Might be far-fetched, and I'm sorry if this was brought up already, and I just didn't see it, but given that two named Greyhawk characters (Mordenkainen and Tasha) have been granted their own books, I'd hazard a guess (in fact, I look forward to it) that at least Greyhawk is one of the classics to be released.

That said, Darksun, and either Planescape or Spelljammer would be nice.

[Sparky McDibben]

I love the Ravnica setting. Is so much fun.

Ravnica was freaking amazing, and completely changed how I prepped my adventures. Very much a revolutionary book for me in that sense.

[Luccan]

It really depends. I think the examples you mention are in line with what I've seen, but I've also seen a lot of anger on 4e's take on Forgotten Realms. I do agree that there's no harm in ressurrecting old settings, when it pleases the old and it doesn't matter for the new. Then again, I wouldn't mind either if they made new, really good setting specifically for 5e; we have a few attempts (Ravnica, Theros, Wildemount), but all of those aren't really settings, just 1 book, and while I don't know the last one, from what I've read so far on how people like them I don't think one of them should be made '5e's setting'.

The only reason I'm not enthused by a 5e setting is because so far WotC hasn't done much with their extant settings this edition. Wildemount has a lot of info, but it's also only 30-50% of the full setting. Also those settings aren't really what I'd call 5e settings. The first two are adapted from MTG and while fun they miss some of the MTG character. Meanwhile, Wildemount (or rather Exandria) started out as a Pathfinder home game which is the reason Mercer has a Gunner homebrew subclass

[Segev]

Ravnica was freaking amazing, and completely changed how I prepped my adventures. Very much a revolutionary book for me in that sense.
How did it change your adventure preparation?

[zinycor]

How did it change your adventure preparation?

I can't speak for sparky, but in my case it gave backgrounds new life.

Also, I used to play Werewolf the Apicalypse, and the guilds in Ravnica reminded me a whole lot of the werewolf tribes. I love me some factions, I even incorporated SWN mechanics for faction turns.

[MrStabby]

Might be far-fetched, and I'm sorry if this was brought up already, and I just didn't see it, but given that two named Greyhawk characters (Mordenkainen and Tasha) have been granted their own books, I'd hazard a guess (in fact, I look forward to it) that at least Greyhawk is one of the classics to be released.

That said, Darksun, and either Planescape or Spelljammer would be nice.

Oh good point. I had completely missed this.




Ravnica was freaking amazing, and completely changed how I prepped my adventures. Very much a revolutionary book for me in that sense.

Yeah, I think the setting is awesome, the book is (mostly) great... I worry that a lot of people dont like it who never actually bought/read it and just dont like there being and d&d overlap with MtG. There may be some overlap with those who feel a sense of superiority from knowledge of d&d history; knowledge which would be undermined by new setting or impoted settings. I believe such people are few in number though.

[ahyangyi]

Bad news: All three settings are different versions of the Forgotten Realms, all set during different time periods

Each version of Forgotten Realm with a different Mystra?

[micahaphone]

This is probably kicking the hornets nest for a place like gitp forums but why is there a need for re-releases of old settings? Like, is there much mechanical stuff in the old settings books?

To air my own biases, 90% of the time I've played in homebrew worlds, and even when using modules, the DM will usually tweak things a tad to fit into their world or their version of FR.

Like, if I were to decide to run a Dark Sun or a Ravenloft campaign for my table, what's preventing me from grabbing a settings guide from a previous edition and using that to help me understand that world?

[Segev]

This is probably kicking the hornets nest for a place like gitp forums but why is there a need for re-releases of old settings? Like, is there much mechanical stuff in the old settings books?

To air my own biases, 90% of the time I've played in homebrew worlds, and even when using modules, the DM will usually tweak things a tad to fit into their world or their version of FR.

Like, if I were to decide to run a Dark Sun or a Ravenloft campaign for my table, what's preventing me from grabbing a settings guide from a previous edition and using that to help me understand that world?

It depends on how much the stat blocks for NPCs matter to you, and how much you care about setting-specific magic items, spells, feats, classes, etc.

If the Red Wizards of Thay were said in your 3e book to have a unique PrC, would you want the mechanics for that as a wizard subclass in 5e? If all you have is Dragonlance 2E, how do sorcerers fit into the setting? You can say, “They don’t,” of course, but surely you can see why there are people who want their setting and edition of D&D to go hand-in-hand better than that.

[micahaphone]

It depends on how much the stat blocks for NPCs matter to you, and how much you care about setting-specific magic items, spells, feats, classes, etc.

If the Red Wizards of Thay were said in your 3e book to have a unique PrC, would you want the mechanics for that as a wizard subclass in 5e? If all you have is Dragonlance 2E, how do sorcerers fit into the setting? You can say, “They don’t,” of course, but surely you can see why there are people who want their setting and edition of D&D to go hand-in-hand better than that.

So there is some setting specific mechanical stuff that needs to be updated. Thank you, that's good to know.

I only have the 5e eberron book, ravnica, and wildemount, and I feel like 90% of those are rules-agnostic, so I wasn't sure about the "classic" settings.

[Unoriginal]

If the Red Wizards of Thay were said in your 3e book to have a unique PrC, would you want the mechanics for that as a wizard subclass in 5e?

Didn't the Red Wizards actually have an unique PrC in 3.X?

[Waazraath]

Didn't the Red Wizards actually have an unique PrC in 3.X?

They did in the 3.0 campaign setting, but as far as I know it didn't get updated in the 3.5 upgrade that was Player's Guide to Faerun, or one of the other later (3.5) books.

[Luccan]

They did in the 3.0 campaign setting, but as far as I know it didn't get updated in the 3.5 upgrade that was Player's Guide to Faerun, or one of the other later (3.5) books.

It was in the 3.5 DMG, I think

[Waazraath]

It was in the 3.5 DMG, I think

100% correct! That explains why they didn't do a remake in one of the later Fearun books.

[Sparky McDibben]

How did it change your adventure preparation?

A few different ways. One, I started realizing how potent factions were as a tool by seeing how the developers had incorporated the guilds into every facet of Ravnica. They're baked in and difficult to escape, so the guilds themselves can either drive or participate in almost every event in your game. Two, I realized my prep was ass-backwards. At the time, I was running active villains who would advance things like adventure fronts as the heroes kept trying to keep the pot from boiling over. The problem was that I had difficulty pacing that correctly, and it made it a lot harder for heroes to plot out their own quests or goals. Ravnica opened my eyes to procedurally generated adventures tied to stuff in the world, which was amazing to me. You can sit down with Ravnica and some dice and have an adventure inside of 30 minutes. I skinnied that down some, and can now have an adventure ready to go in about five minutes before my game. Three, it gave me a toolbox and a framework for how to think about intrigue, and how to structure intrigue between factions, sects, and individuals, with that being the Renown system. I kind of converted that to Infamy, which let me track how the heroes are perceived in the various factions of the world, with benefits and penalties for doing other factions favors. For example, if you hit +50 Renown with the Cult of Bastet, you get free magic item identification and half-off all consumable magic items. But if you piss them off consistently and hit -50, your house is constantly surrounded by caterwauling kittens day and night and all of your neighbors will be slowly pressured to ignore you.


I can't speak for sparky, but in my case it gave backgrounds new life.

Also, I used to play Werewolf the Apicalypse, and the guilds in Ravnica reminded me a whole lot of the werewolf tribes. I love me some factions, I even incorporated SWN mechanics for faction turns.

God, I used to love old White Wolf. I think Onyx Path is doing a better job continuing that spirit, but those games were a lot of fun. Even if there was a total lack of any mathematical structure.


This is probably kicking the hornets nest for a place like gitp forums but why is there a need for re-releases of old settings? Like, is there much mechanical stuff in the old settings books?

To air my own biases, 90% of the time I've played in homebrew worlds, and even when using modules, the DM will usually tweak things a tad to fit into their world or their version of FR.

Like, if I were to decide to run a Dark Sun or a Ravenloft campaign for my table, what's preventing me from grabbing a settings guide from a previous edition and using that to help me understand that world?

In my mind, basically nothing. I think you can definitely reflavor a bunch of stuff for character options, but you might have to make some conceits for a given setting. For instance, in Midnight, the only clerics left are clerics of Izrador, the Shadow in the North. So you might outright ban clerics...or you might reskin them. You might introduce a heroic path (which were a thing in that setting) that allows access to healing magic and some of the cleric spells.


It depends on how much the stat blocks for NPCs matter to you, and how much you care about setting-specific magic items, spells, feats, classes, etc.

If the Red Wizards of Thay were said in your 3e book to have a unique PrC, would you want the mechanics for that as a wizard subclass in 5e? If all you have is Dragonlance 2E, how do sorcerers fit into the setting? You can say, “They don’t,” of course, but surely you can see why there are people who want their setting and edition of D&D to go hand-in-hand better than that.

I disagree (respectfully - it's a matter of taste) with this take. Personally, I think you can redefine whatever you want. If you want the Red Wizards to exist in your setting, you can easily drop in similar mechanics. You might make a feat that covers the circle magic of 3.5e. Or you might give them a magic item like an enchanted tattoo needle which allows them to cast spells into tattoos on willing participants which last for up to one week or the spell's duration, whichever is longer. Or give them an epic boon that allows them to add a bonus equal to their Int bonus to saving throws so long as they have their spellbook on them. I get that it's a matter of style, but I really don't care about having a subclass to replace every 3.5 prestige class. All that does is reinvent the wheel; I'd rather see new settings, new horizons, and new content. That doesn't invalidate the position you describe, though.


Didn't the Red Wizards actually have an unique PrC in 3.X?

They did, in the 3.5e DMG. I always loved the Thayan Knight PrC because it evoked these poor bastards who didn't seem like they had a choice in serving the zulkirs, but whose abilities powered the growth of an empire.

[Brookshw]

Like, if I were to decide to run a Dark Sun or a Ravenloft campaign for my table, what's preventing me from grabbing a settings guide from a previous edition and using that to help me understand that world?

Ravenloft wouldn't be that hard, Darksun had a number of unique things that would need new mechanics not found elsewhere (preserver vs. defiler, lots of unique monsters, psionics). To your point, depends on the setting you want to port forward; older books/modules are still helpful for setting lore and feel but need various levels of translation (and likely revision to modern game theory design, I don't expect us to be tracking the plane a magic weapon was made on a'la Planescape anymore).

[Corsair14]

Ravenloft and Greyhawk are fairly easy to switch to 5th just using prior setting books. There are next to no mechanical differences and the few that do for RL are easy to implement.

Spelljammer needs quite a bit involving naval combat and updating some of the setting specific races for 5th. Naval combat aside, its fairly easy to convert.

Dragonlance - There are a lot of mechanics that need updating. New classes, removed classes, new races and removed races. Wizard classes work differently, quite a few classes, races and archtypes wouldnt be present and there are several new ones like the various Draconians and everyone's all time favorites kender and gully dwarves. Moon affecting magic, the knightly orders, etc etc. You could easily do a sourcebook twice the size of SCAG just on Ansalon.

Planescape - this one is odd, in some ways it runs like any other world, but in others it is complicated. I think you could do it in a SCAG sized book but it would mostly be fluff(which we can already go look up). I loved the art more than the setting.

Dark Sun- the hardest setting to update. You need a robust psionics section with wild talents and trained classes. Many races wont exist, many classes wont exist. Replaced with the setting specific races and classes. Magic obviously works different, survival skills and exhaustion will need a rework. It will take a lot of work to make it so players used to easy mode in FR can survive in hard mode DS where even the plants arent above eating players for a bit of water. It truly is a survival game where keeping track of water and rations actually matters.

So if they are updating 3 older settings and assuming they are picking the three settings that are the hardest to convert mechanics to 5th SpellJammer, Dark Sun and Dragonlance. But out of those three I can only see them doing Spelljammer. Dark Sun requires more effort than I think Wizards is going to be willing to do, not to mention getting Brom back to do the art which made the setting so great and the fairly uncomfortable themes which even mentioning them gets people banned. (There's historian on youtube that when he made a video about ancient Greece he had to call slaves "house hold helpers" because youtube demonetized his first video that used the word slaves. Dragonlance is fairly involved and I am not sure on who actually has the rights. That said the various Draconian races are still my favorite in DnD.

So more likely to me they will do Spelljammer(they have been hinting) Ravenloft(the few mechanics are easy to fit to 5th and CoS was so popular), and Planescape.

[Segev]

A few different ways. One, I started realizing how potent factions were as a tool by seeing how the developers had incorporated the guilds into every facet of Ravnica. They're baked in and difficult to escape, so the guilds themselves can either drive or participate in almost every event in your game. Two, I realized my prep was ass-backwards. At the time, I was running active villains who would advance things like adventure fronts as the heroes kept trying to keep the pot from boiling over. The problem was that I had difficulty pacing that correctly, and it made it a lot harder for heroes to plot out their own quests or goals. Ravnica opened my eyes to procedurally generated adventures tied to stuff in the world, which was amazing to me. You can sit down with Ravnica and some dice and have an adventure inside of 30 minutes. I skinnied that down some, and can now have an adventure ready to go in about five minutes before my game. Three, it gave me a toolbox and a framework for how to think about intrigue, and how to structure intrigue between factions, sects, and individuals, with that being the Renown system. I kind of converted that to Infamy, which let me track how the heroes are perceived in the various factions of the world, with benefits and penalties for doing other factions favors. For example, if you hit +50 Renown with the Cult of Bastet, you get free magic item identification and half-off all consumable magic items. But if you piss them off consistently and hit -50, your house is constantly surrounded by caterwauling kittens day and night and all of your neighbors will be slowly pressured to ignore you.Interesting. I will have to look into the procedural generation you mention.



I disagree (respectfully - it's a matter of taste) with this take. Personally, I think you can redefine whatever you want. If you want the Red Wizards to exist in your setting, you can easily drop in similar mechanics. You might make a feat that covers the circle magic of 3.5e. Or you might give them a magic item like an enchanted tattoo needle which allows them to cast spells into tattoos on willing participants which last for up to one week or the spell's duration, whichever is longer. Or give them an epic boon that allows them to add a bonus equal to their Int bonus to saving throws so long as they have their spellbook on them. I get that it's a matter of style, but I really don't care about having a subclass to replace every 3.5 prestige class. All that does is reinvent the wheel; I'd rather see new settings, new horizons, and new content. That doesn't invalidate the position you describe, though.
I agree that it's a matter of taste. My main point was that for some, they want their setting to have explained "places" in it for all the game's content. Or at least to explicitly state why it's not there, and couldn't be there.

[furby076]

If we get Dragonlance, I'm playing Kender (we are allowed to play any oficial material). This will mean the group will kill me, not saying the kender-- thats a given- just kill me. Mentioning "They who shall not be named" is a straight up table curse for the session :D So, yeea, I'm a play a kender, and it will be Ssat...sister of you know who

[Luccan]

If we get Dragonlance, I'm playing Kender (we are allowed to play any oficial material). This will mean the group will kill me, not saying the kender-- thats a given- just kill me. Mentioning "They who shall not be named" is a straight up table curse for the session :D So, yeea, I'm a play a kender, and it will be Ssat...sister of you know who

I saw a suggestion somewhere on the general RPG forum that rather than encouraging Kender to steal* from teammates, you can just give them a racial ability that basically lets you pull a small, inexpensive item a few times a day with the explanation being that you just picked it up somewhere and forgot about it until now. And you can occasionally RP the Kender handing basic items to other PCs during non-combat segments without disrupting the table by actually stealing the barbarian's pitons or something. Seems a more reasonable way to run the concept.

*It doesn't matter why the Kender does it or what they call it; when you, the human player, have your character do that it's still stealing from other PCs and you should rightly be shamed for it if your table finds it disruptive.

[Arkhios]

While I would certainly be excited if Dragonlance came out for 5e, I have to wonder how would they implement black, white, and red orders of wizards, as I recall they're rather open-ended in some regards and very strict in others.

Each order simply could not cast spells of certain schools. As such, the wizard from PHB would require additional restrictions (and possibly a bonus ability as a remedy for the restrictions).

Also, fun fact: At one point, there was a class called Mystic for Dragonlance, and it was a divine caster (as it should be; not psionic!)

[Azuresun]

Didn't the Red Wizards actually have an unique PrC in 3.X?

If you ask "did X have a unique prestige class in 3e", the answer is always yes. :smalltongue:

[Arkhios]

It was in the 3.5 DMG, I think

3.5 Dungeon Master's Guide? No, it wasn't. DMG contains the Archmage (and Loremaster) though. In fact, none of the PrC's in DMG are setting-specific.

[Luccan]

3.5 Dungeon Master's Guide? No, it wasn't. DMG contains the Archmage (and Loremaster) though. In fact, none of the PrC's in DMG are setting-specific.

I just checked, Red Wizard is on page 193 of the 3.5 DMG. It wouldn't be allowed on the SRD, I believe

[Joe the Rat]

If we get Dragonlance, I'm playing Kender (we are allowed to play any oficial material). This will mean the group will kill me, not saying the kender-- thats a given- just kill me. Mentioning "They who shall not be named" is a straight up table curse for the session :D So, yeea, I'm a play a kender, and it will be Ssat...sister of you know who


I saw a suggestion somewhere on the general RPG forum that rather than encouraging Kender to steal* from teammates, you can just give them a racial ability that basically lets you pull a small, inexpensive item a few times a day with the explanation being that you just picked it up somewhere and forgot about it until now. And you can occasionally RP the Kender handing basic items to other PCs during non-combat segments without disrupting the table by actually stealing the barbarian's pitons or something. Seems a more reasonable way to run the concept.

*It doesn't matter why the Kender does it or what they call it; when you, the human player, have your character do that it's still stealing from other PCs and you should rightly be shamed for it if your table finds it disruptive.

Well, obviously you need to follow Wheaton's Rule #1.

But I think that's one of the things Kender players (and their DMs) get wrong. You aren't stealing people's stuff. You never want to steal things. You just want to look at them. And set them down, or maybe drop it into a pocket, or in a freshly cleaned ale barrel, or what not. But you really don't have a lot of volitional control over where the item ends up. Hell, if you want to stay true to the spirit of the little plot-armored twerps, the PC probably ought not have volitional control on when items get handled in the first place.

For a 3.5 game, I was... assigned a Kender. In addition to the 2nd ed era "random pocket stuff" rules, something we added for flavor is that occasionally when someone goes to pull out an item, the Kender handed it to them. Something I was eyeing was being able to hand one PC's stuff to other PCs when needed. Basically for 5e Parlance, when someone is going for an Object Interaction or Use Item or Use Magic Item, the Kender player can, as a Reaction, have the item and be the location where the object/item use occurs. As another angle, The Kender can rearrange equipment - again, you want someone to have an item not currently in use, klepto-change-o, the Kender uses a racial and the object is in that other person's possession. At least when you absentmindedly put something down, you put it in someone else's stuff.
Yeah, needs some wording massaging, but basically if the "Owner" and the "Handler" are in accordance, the Kender can effectively be an object use familiar or a walking bag of many hands. A touch narrativist, but it gives you a mechanical use for the Handling flavor that doesn't lean into Rick-headed kleptomania.

[KorvinStarmast]

This is probably kicking the hornets nest for a place like gitp forums but why is there a need for re-releases of old settings? Like, is there much mechanical stuff in the old settings books? Answer 1: revenue stream and keeping the brand/product visible. Answer 2: fold the 5e mechanics in to reduce/avoid/eliminate loopholes and cheese.

Like, if I were to decide to run a Dark Sun or a Ravenloft campaign for my table, what's preventing me from grabbing a settings guide from a previous edition and using that to help me understand that world? Nothing. The books save you the work of conversion for the fiddly bits that were excised out of the previous editions for this one.

I only have the 5e eberron book, ravnica, and wildemount I have Theros and Eberron, and I don't want to DM either. (But each has some neat stuff)

Ravenloft and Greyhawk are fairly easy to switch to 5th just using prior setting books. Yes.

Dragonlance - There are a lot of mechanics that need updating. The three colors of magic thing really does not fit D&D 5e and the "no clerics in the world" thing (I played the first module, Rivermoon was the only freaking cleric known in the known world at one point). While in time retconned/written out as a plot point, it is a horrible lore fit with any and all other settings. Plus: get rid of Kender. Grief play personified. {further comments self censored}

Planescape - this one is odd, in some ways it runs like any other world, but in others it is complicated. I think you could do it in a SCAG sized book but it would mostly be fluff(which we can already go look up). I loved the art more than the setting. I think 5e will fit with this pretty well, not too many tweaks needed, but a whole lot more celestials are needed ...

Dark Sun- the hardest setting to update. You need a robust psionics section with wild talents and trained classes. Many races wont exist, many classes wont exist. Replaced with the setting specific races and classes. Magic obviously works different, survival skills and exhaustion will need a rework. It will take a lot of work to make it so players used to easy mode in FR can survive in hard mode DS where even the plants arent above eating players for a bit of water. It truly is a survival game where keeping track of water and rations actually matters. 1. Yes on the need for psionics to go final before they do this.
2. Yes on must do Defilier / Preserver, and you pick when you start at level 1.
3. Also, no multiclassing between preserver / defiler. It really is an either / or deal.
4. Races: honestly, there may be a way to stretch that a little bit. But some of the very old school DS feel might be lost. This one's tricky.

So more likely to me they will do Spelljammer(they have been hinting) Ravenloft(the few mechanics are easy to fit to 5th and CoS was so popular), and Planescape. Hard to bet against, but I still want Darksun. (Selfish old cuss that I am).

If we get Dragonlance, I'm playing Kender Peter Pan just called, and he told me that every time someone plays a Kender a Fairie dies. Keep Tinkerbell alive! Please! :smallbiggrin:

I saw a suggestion somewhere on the general RPG forum that rather than encouraging Kender to steal* from teammates, you can just give them a racial ability that basically lets you pull a small, inexpensive item a few times a day with the explanation being that you just picked it up somewhere and forgot about it until now. And you can occasionally RP the Kender handing basic items to other PCs during non-combat segments without disrupting the table by actually stealing the barbarian's pitons or something. Seems a more reasonable way to run the concept.
It's still grief play. No sale (though I appreciate that the intentions are good).
My two beans on this idea: legislating that much RP is not great for player agency, I don't think, and takes us back to "Thou Shalt Be A Stick In The Mud" paladin rules constraints kind of stuff that 5e has move beyond. Thankfully. (I love Ancients Paladin, I really do).

*It doesn't matter why the Kender does it or what they call it; when you, the human player, have your character do that it's still stealing from other PCs and you should rightly be shamed for it if your table finds it disruptive. Grief play; why make it easy to happen, structurally?

Each order simply could not cast spells of certain schools. Can we please not go back to that very annoying forbidden schools of magic thing? I never liked it, and I still don't like it. Yes, that's a matter of taste.

Well, obviously you need to follow Wheaton's Rule #1. Which is "Friends don't let friends play Kender" Right? :smallbiggrin:
Oh, wait, that's just a paraphrasing of DBAD. :smallcool:

[Segev]

"Here you go" (Kender racial feature): As a reaction, you can Use An Object on behalf of another character to hand them an item that is in their possession, your possession, or possession of anybody who considers themselves both your and the target character's ally and is within 30 feet. This does not count as the target character's Use An Object action, and leaves them holding or carrying the item as if they had Used An Object to ready it properly.

[KorvinStarmast]

"Here you go" (Kender racial feature): As a reaction, you can Use An Object on behalf of another character to hand them an item that is in their possession, your possession, or possession of anybody who considers themselves both your and the target character's ally and is within 30 feet. This does not count as the target character's Use An Object action, and leaves them holding or carrying the item as if they had Used An Object to ready it properly. Still grief play, although now and again hilarious and now and again handy in combat. (Reminds me of an old Marx Brothers routine where Harpo kept handing people his leg to hold ...)

[Segev]

Still grief play, although now and again hilarious and now and again handy in combat. (Reminds me of an old Marx Brothers routine where Harpo kept handing people his leg to hold ...)

Not sure how it's grief play. I tried to write it such that the assumption is that all parties involved are in favor of the transaction, though I guess I wasn't explicit about that. In particular, though, it costs the Kender his Reaction, gives the target character an object interaction he doesn't need to use his free one or an action on, and can transport items cross-party without needing to actually ferry them around or use anybody else's object interactions to fish them out.

[KorvinStarmast]

Not sure how it's grief play. I tried to write it such that the assumption is that all parties involved are in favor of the transaction, though I guess I wasn't explicit about that. In particular, though, it costs the Kender his Reaction, gives the target character an object interaction he doesn't need to use his free one or an action on, and can transport items cross-party without needing to actually ferry them around or use anybody else's object interactions to fish them out. Mechanically, someone else is putting stuff into and taking stuff out of your hands.

Gee, now I can't use my material component or my somatic component, since that little {censored} just stuffed a broom/knife/potions/beer into my hand on my turn

... leaves them holding or carrying the item as if they had Used

(Also: adding fiddly bits must be done with care)

I can see how with the best of intentions you see this as a boon, but I have already shown one case where it is not.
I doubt that is the only one.

[Tawmis]

The three colors of magic thing really does not fit D&D 5e and the "no clerics in the world" thing (I played the first module, Rivermoon was the only freaking cleric known in the known world at one point). While in time retconned/written out as a plot point, it is a horrible lore fit with any and all other settings. Plus: get rid of Kender. Grief play personified. {further comments self censored}
I think 5e will fit with this pretty well, not too many tweaks needed, but a whole lot more celestials are needed ...


You do realize the "no clerics" thing was just a specific period of time, right? And that by the end of Chronicles (the main books), it opens the door to Clerics?
You seem very attached to "no clerics" (mentioned it two or three times in this thread?)... and honestly, if you play a time line post Chronicles, Clerics will be around. Or if you play before the Kingpriest's Cataclysm event.
But I would assume if they did Dragonlance - they'd bring the timeline up to the point where the Clerics have been brought back into the world, for ease of the game (but welcome the idea of you can play during an era without clerics... and it's not even that the world was without it... it was just VERY rare, Goldmoon for example - so whose to say there wasn't someone else out there, who found a necklace, a ring, etc, that's associated to the gods and granting powers, that the gods gave them clerical abilities...)

To make it associate to something else - it's like saying, "You can't play Star Wars RPGs because there's no Jedi." If all you focused on was ANH to Return of the Jedi. And you refused to acknowledge there were Jedi before and after that trilogy (which similar to Dragonlance, opened the door to Jedi by the end).

[KorvinStarmast]

You do realize the "no clerics" thing was just a specific period of time, right? Yes, I read the books when they came out. Not worth a re read, any of them.

And that by the end of Chronicles (the main books), it opens the door to Clerics?
And?

You seem very attached to "no clerics" (mentioned it two or three times in this thread?) Clerics are a core class in D&D going back to 1974. I found the entire story line, and the entire premise, to make a mess of D&D, not to mention the idiot character of Fizban and Kender at all. I read it because, well, it was a novel idea: write novels connected to modules that you could play. But that novelty wore off rather quickly. There was occasional good writing. The Twins trilogy was good enough to keep my interest. Of course, I was at sea for a good bit of the time those books were easy to get to, and I read a lot, so maybe my standard were lowered.

Raistlin: an interesting character study.
Kit, his half sister: an interesting character.
The Death of Sturm: that was a well done "kill off a main character" move.

One of the best stories in the whole series wasn't even in the books. It was a short story about Raist going to the tower for his test. It was published IIRC in Dragon magazine, though it may have been in a different periodical. It was release as a teaser for the series, and it was good. What followed was uneven.

The world building? Poor to trite to bad.
Draconians, particularly in book 1? Garbage.

They did a better job with the Darksword Trilogy, and for the Death Gate cycle.
The dragonships ... I could not make it past book one.

[JadedDM]

The three colors of magic thing really does not fit D&D 5e and the "no clerics in the world" thing (I played the first module, Rivermoon was the only freaking cleric known in the known world at one point). While in time retconned/written out as a plot point, it is a horrible lore fit with any and all other settings. Plus: get rid of Kender. Grief play personified. {further comments self censored}

It's Goldmoon. Riverwind was her partner, who was a ranger, not a cleric. You seem to have conflated the two. Also, she was not the only cleric in the world, just the only (at the time) Good one. There were lots of evil clerics about. And it wasn't a retcon, it was the entire point of the first adventure--to bring back good clerics and restore the balance. And what difference does it make if it fits the lore of other settings?

As for the three orders of magic not fitting into 5E, why not? There are Good Wizards, Neutral Wizards and Evil Wizards in 5E, yes?

[Segev]

Mechanically, someone else is putting stuff into and taking stuff out of your hands.

Gee, now I can't use my material component or my somatic component, since that little {censored} just stuffed a broom/knife/potions/beer into my hand on my turn


(Also: adding fiddly bits must be done with care)

I can see how with the best of intentions you see this as a boon, but I have already shown one case where it is not.
I doubt that is the only one.

I thought I had it require their hand to be free. No swapping things out. That would really get into rogue class feature territory.

[KorvinStarmast]

It's Goldmoon. Indeed. Riverwind was her lover/squeeze/boy toy/love interest, whatever. The black dragon picked him to make a point. :smallyuk:

Yeah, it's been over 30 years since I read it.

5e doesn't do alignment like that, in re the colors of magic. So no, it is not a good fit. And quite frankly, that three choices didn't even fit the AD&D that the modules/books were written for. It fit the OD&D three alignment schtick, but failed to adhere to it.

@Segev:
I hate to be such a downer, but kender are both a poor idea and a poor implementation of an idea. Hobbits were a literary device that was wrapped in anachronisms that did any number of narratively useful things.

1. The further you got from Hobbiton, the closer you got to that nasty thing of The Real World.
2. A connection to the reader
3. Embodied "I'm just one person, what can I do to make a difference in this world?" Tolkien's answer was "more that you would expect"
4. Comic relief.
5. A sense of wonder at the magic of the wide world once you leave home.
6. Bucolic fantasy of how the country is a paradise compared to more developed modern urban settlements.
7. In the scouring of the Shire, a vivid variation on 'you can never go home again' followed by the wish fulfillment fantasy of the soil and nut gift to Sam from Galadriel.

The list goes on and on

Kender are a cheap imitation that don't work.
Tass driving around a literal flying fortress: didn't work.
The 'can't feel fear' rubbish with a variety of awkward scenes of Tass 'not feeling fear but something like it'
I'll stop now.

[Tawmis]

Yes, I read the books when they came out. Not worth a re read, any of them.


Just like anything, it's not for everyone. You didn't enjoy'em. That's fine. My enthusiasm for the books makes up for the lack of yours. :)

Tawmis saying - RE: You seem stuck on "no clerics"



And? Clerics are a core class in D&D going back to 1974. I found the entire story line, and the entire premise, to make a mess of D&D, not to mention the idiot character of Fizban and Kender at all. I read it because, well, it was a novel idea: write novels connected to modules that you could play. But that novelty wore off rather quickly. There was occasional good writing. The Twins trilogy was good enough to keep my interest. Of course, I was at sea for a good bit of the time those books were easy to get to, and I read a lot, so maybe my standard were lowered.


Right. But we're talking if they (and I don't think they will) use Dragonlance for D&D 5e. You seem latched to "no clerics."
Which, my point was - was for a time period, yes. But Dragonlance lore (which you don't seem to be a fan of, so maybe not aware) - did get to a point where Clerics were a part of the world.
So your concern about Clerics are a core class in D&D going back to 1974 seems off.
Because, Clerics were a part of Dragonlance, before the Cataclym and after the Chronicles (the first trilogy).
And again, there's no reason even if you got a group to play between Cataclysm and end of Chronicles, that you or someone in the party, wasn't bestowed some quest by another goddess.
Going back to my reference to "you can't have a Star Wars RPG because there's no Jedi" if all you did was base it on ANH to Return... that's silly.
You could play before the Jedi got wiped out (play before the Clerics vanished), or play after the Jedi return (play after Chronicles), or play a random person who has Jedi (Cleric) powers.
All it takes is imagination. The core fundamental to D&D.

[KorvinStarmast]

Just like anything, it's not for everyone. You didn't enjoy'em. That's fine. My enthusiasm for the books makes up for the lack of yours. :) . There's no accounting for taste and I am glad you enjoyed them more than I did. :)

gustibus non disputandum est

Or words to that effect. Not sure I am adding any value at this point, so thanks and cheers.

[JadedDM]

5e doesn't do alignment like that, in re the colors of magic.

I'll have to disagree on that. As far as I can tell, 5E doesn't do alignment any differently than say, 1E, 2E or 3E.

[Wildstag]

I'll have to disagree on that. As far as I can tell, 5E doesn't do alignment any differently than say, 1E, 2E or 3E.

Detect Evil/Good/Chaos/Law, or really just aligned spells in general. 5E definitely does NOT do alignment similarly to 3e.

[JadedDM]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but...

In 1E there were nine alignments: Lawful Good, Neutral Good, Chaotic Good, Lawful Neutral, True Neutral, Chaotic Neutral, Lawful Evil, Neutral Evil and Chaotic Evil.

In 2E there were nine alignments: Lawful Good, Neutral Good, Chaotic Good, Lawful Neutral, True Neutral, Chaotic Neutral, Lawful Evil, Neutral Evil and Chaotic Evil.

In 3E there were nine alignments: Lawful Good, Neutral Good, Chaotic Good, Lawful Neutral, True Neutral, Chaotic Neutral, Lawful Evil, Neutral Evil and Chaotic Evil.

In 5E there are nine alignments: Lawful Good, Neutral Good, Chaotic Good, Lawful Neutral, True Neutral, Chaotic Neutral, Lawful Evil, Neutral Evil and Chaotic Evil.

From my understanding, 4E was the only outlier.

[PhoenixPhyre]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but...

In 1E there were nine alignments: Lawful Good, Neutral Good, Chaotic Good, Lawful Neutral, True Neutral, Chaotic Neutral, Lawful Evil, Neutral Evil and Chaotic Evil.

In 2E there were nine alignments: Lawful Good, Neutral Good, Chaotic Good, Lawful Neutral, True Neutral, Chaotic Neutral, Lawful Evil, Neutral Evil and Chaotic Evil.

In 3E there were nine alignments: Lawful Good, Neutral Good, Chaotic Good, Lawful Neutral, True Neutral, Chaotic Neutral, Lawful Evil, Neutral Evil and Chaotic Evil.

In 5E there are nine alignments: Lawful Good, Neutral Good, Chaotic Good, Lawful Neutral, True Neutral, Chaotic Neutral, Lawful Evil, Neutral Evil and Chaotic Evil.

From my understanding, 4E was the only outlier.

Same names, different meanings and especially game mechanics.

[KorvinStarmast]

Correct me if I'm wrong
That's nine, not three, which is what the three towers reflect, right? That makes it look a lot more like OD&D or like Basic.

Did Basic etc have BECMI five? (Or was that in 4e only? Checking rules compendium, brb) Nope, BECMI had three. Law, Neutral and Chaos.

As to comparing how alignment works in game, 5e is a significant departure from 1-3 in application of how it influences game play.

Descriptive not prescriptive. (And that's a good thing, for my money)

[Tawmis]

That's nine, not three, which is what the three towers reflect, right? That makes it look a lot more like OD&D or like Basic.


Easily fixed.

White Robes: LG, CG, NG.
Red Robes: LN, CN, TN.
Black Robes: LE, CE, NE.

Because characters like Fistandantilus would have clearly been CE, but still wore Black Robes. Raist would have eventually become NE in Twins.

[JadedDM]

I mean, that's exactly how it works. White Robes are Good, Red Robes are Neutral, Black Robes are Evil. To say that doesn't 'fit' with 5E makes no sense to me at all. Good, Neutrality and Evil still exist in the alignment spectrum of 5E, so yeah, it is the same as it was in the past.

I honestly don't see what's different now that would make any difference, mechanically or otherwise.

Are there Good Wizards in 5E?
Are there Neutral Wizards in 5E?
Are there Evil Wizards in 5E?

Yes to all three? So what exactly is the issue that makes 5E alignment no longer a good 'fit' for this, because I'm not getting it.

[Segev]

What spells were restricted by robe color?

[Willie the Duck]

Did Basic etc have BECMI five? (Or was that in 4e only? Checking rules compendium, brb) Nope, BECMI had three. Law, Neutral and Chaos.

Holmes Basic had 5. BX and BECMI had 3.

[Joe the Rat]

What spells were restricted by robe color?

Operating from old memories of the SSI games, broadly speaking, White got Abjuration (or Enchantment? I seem to remember White got Sleep), Red Evocation, and Black Necromancy. I'm trying to remember if there were other restrictions, but Red=Lightning Bolt (because the SSI games were hardcore serious about bouncing 'bolts) was all I needed to know.

If you wanted to avoid the school restrictions, then you could probably run them as variations on the current Specialists. But that does lose some of the character of the setting.
What is probably going to be most influential is handling the impact of the moons.

[MrStabby]

three alignment schtick, but failed to adhere to it.

@Segev:
I hate to be such a downer, but kender are both a poor idea and a poor implementation of an idea. Hobbits were a literary device that was wrapped in anachronisms that did any number of narratively useful things.

1. The further you got from Hobbiton, the closer you got to that nasty thing of The Real World.
2. A connection to the reader
3. Embodied "I'm just one person, what can I do to make a difference in this world?" Tolkien's answer was "more that you would expect"
4. Comic relief.
5. A sense of wonder at the magic of the wide world once you leave home.
6. Bucolic fantasy of how the country is a paradise compared to more developed modern urban settlements.
7. In the scouring of the Shire, a vivid variation on 'you can never go home again' followed by the wish fulfillment fantasy of the soil and nut gift to Sam from Galadriel.


I think the main point is that they are ignorant - they are a device to allow wizards and Lords to undertake exposition, to tell them how the world works so the reader can hear it being told. In D&D there is no need for this role in quite the same way. We understand what magic is and some of us might have even seen a monster manual from time to time.

[Corsair14]

I read a fair bit of DL. There were no spell or school restrictions with the white, red and black towers. It is purely an instrument to effect moon magic and how they power the different towers at different times. There's nothing wrong with using the system in 5e.

[KorvinStarmast]

Holmes Basic had 5. BX and BECMI had 3. Thank you, I recalled an outlier somewhere but I could not remember, and yet Holmes Basic also had that two axis grid from strategic review in it ... arrrgh ....

[rooneg]

I read a fair bit of DL. There were no spell or school restrictions with the white, red and black towers. It is purely an instrument to effect moon magic and how they power the different towers at different times. There's nothing wrong with using the system in 5e.

There were school restrictions in the original Dragonlance Adventures hardcover rulebook (various schools are specific to one order of wizards, others are split between multiple, including the fun filled "Conjuring/Summoning is Red, but Conjuring is White and Summoning is Black"). The novels never mention it specifically as far as I can recall.

[Spriteless]

I found Dragonlance fun because it was very much a book series based on the games. It asked questions like, how would [game convention] affect a living world?

Alignment led to the Gods' three factions. Spell levels led to the Tower Mages policing magic according to level. High level magic led to the Cataclysm. Sometimes a hero will attack, and miss, and it isn't edited out to make the fight go more smoothly. It's amateur in a way that hews to game logic instead of story logic, but games were still trying to be realistic rather than abstractly balanced, so it wasn't quite Mogworld amounts of silly. Still, I enjoyed a lot of stories that read like someone talking about their campaign. Those hundreds of books led to Weis and co making Dragons of Summer Flames the neatest pile of retcon until their next Dragonlance book. And I enjoyed that too.

[JadedDM]

The whole 'certain schools are forbidden to certain orders' thing was largely ignored in the old days, and removed entirely later on. I wouldn't expect it to crop up again in 5E anyway, any more than I would expect level limits or racial class restrictions to.

The way high sorcery (which is what they called wizardry) in Dragonlance worked was that there were three moons (white, red and black) and three wizard orders based on each moon. The wizard's power waxed and waned slightly as their respective moon did. So if your moon was in high sanction, you got bonus spell slots, bonuses to saving throws against magic, and your spells became more effective (i.e., were treated as if they were cast by a wizard who was one level higher). When your moon was in low sanction, your spells were a bit weaker (as if cast by a wizard one level lower) and your saves got a slight penalty. When all three moons were full and eclipsed, this was called the Night of the Eye, and all magic got a super boost for that one night. Although all of this only applied if you had at least 5 levels as a wizard. Lower than that, you were just an apprentice or dabbler, and the moons didn't affect your power at all.

[Daracaex]

Something I never got about Dragonlance is why on earth the different mage robes even exist. Black robes are evil, yeah? Why would anyone ever sign up for that? Society would just imprison or kill or whatever the wizards with the black robes. I'd assume actual evil wizards would put themselves in white or red and be more subtle about what they actually desire. Maybe this is just because I'm not very familiar with the setting?

[PhoenixPhyre]

Something I never got about Dragonlance is why on earth the different mage robes even exist. Black robes are evil, yeah? Why would anyone ever sign up for that? Society would just imprison or kill or whatever the wizards with the black robes. I'd assume actual evil wizards would put themselves in white or red and be more subtle about what they actually desire. Maybe this is just because I'm not very familiar with the setting?

IIRC (and I was never a big Dragonlance fan), one of the primary subtexts of the setting was the importance of balance. The Cataclysm happened because one nation got too aggressively "good", so the gods smashed it and then left (except an evil one betrayed her fellow gods and stayed behind and meddled).

So Black Robes had a place in society. Not a very nice one in the more hoity-toity nations, but nonetheless a place. And Raistlin, who ended up with a black robe, ended up saving the day in the Chronicles IIRC. Of course it was for his own evil purposes, but...

[rooneg]

IIRC (and I was never a big Dragonlance fan), one of the primary subtexts of the setting was the importance of balance. The Cataclysm happened because one nation got too aggressively "good", so the gods smashed it and then left (except an evil one betrayed her fellow gods and stayed behind and meddled).

So Black Robes had a place in society. Not a very nice one in the more hoity-toity nations, but nonetheless a place. And Raistlin, who ended up with a black robe, ended up saving the day in the Chronicles IIRC. Of course it was for his own evil purposes, but...

There’s also just the fact that the average person in Krynn doesn’t have any real understanding of what the details of the wizards of high sorcery are. A Wizard is a Wizard to them. The whole deal with the three moons and whatnot isn’t public info at all, the black moon that powers the magic of the black robes isn’t visible to the naked eye and is basically unknown.

[KorvinStarmast]

There’s also just the fact that the average person in Krynn doesn’t have any real understanding of what the details of the wizards of high sorcery are. A Wizard is a Wizard to them. The whole deal with the three moons and whatnot isn’t public info at all, the black moon that powers the magic of the black robes isn’t visible to the naked eye and is basically unknown. It wasn't that well thought out, actually. It was a commercially driven product. And it showed. (Still, props to MW and TH for the success they did have).

Their success made RA Salvatore's books possible, in terms of "wait, there is a market for stuff like this, let's try this one out."
The rest, as they say, is Drzzt's story ... :smalltongue:

[PhoenixPhyre]

The rest, as they say, is Drzzt's story ... :smalltongue:

Don't you mean "Drizzt of the story"? :smalltongue:

[KorvinStarmast]

Don't you mean "Drizzt of the story"? :smalltongue:
Ya got me. :smallcool:

[Devils_Advocate]

But I think that's one of the things Kender players (and their DMs) get wrong. You aren't stealing people's stuff.
What do you think the word "steal" means?


As far as I can tell, 5E doesn't do alignment any differently than say, 1E, 2E or 3E.
5E has the "same alignments" as those editions... in that it still uses the same labels, sometimes for quite different things. Neutral is no longer specifically a bizarre "The balance must be preserved!" philosophy, which might have some implications for a setting where that stance played an important role. I think that there has been a bit of a shift from seeing alignments as cosmic factions (each with its own special language!) associated with moral positions, to seeing a creature's alignments as representing that creature's moral nature itself. So instead of "It's important that no faction becomes too powerful, because even the 'Good' gods aren't above mass murder", it's "Of course the Good gods wouldn't commit mass murder".

All that aside, alignment generally just doesn't interact with stuff rulesways in 5E. Pertinently, no class or subclass overtly limits what alignment a character is allowed to be; not even in cases where an implicit restriction clearly does exist, as with some Paladin oaths. You could depart from that convention for Dragonlance... but, due to the considerations mentioned above, Dragonlance's factions aren't 5E's alignments anyway. So, really, the way to include them without having to force anything would be to just let Team White, Team Red, and Team Black be their own thing. Then you can have Team White characters murder as much as you want without contradicting yourself!

[Tawmis]

What do you think the word "steal" means?


I think with Kender...

Steal would indicate an intent to keep by removing it from another person.

A Kender is more often, simply borrowing the item. Because when it's called for or needed, they more often than not simply say, "Oh, you must have dropped it." And return the item.

If one was stealing it, they wouldn't surrender the item over and be more like, "Hey, I think Bob over there was rifling through your bags while we were sleeping - maybe he has your magic ring, Gol' ol' buddy?" (All the while, fondling said golden ring that makes you invisible in your pocket).

[Sigreid]

I think there's a decent chance for Greyhawk given how frequently prominent Greyhawk NPCs have been popping up in the official material.

[Luccan]

I think there's a decent chance for Greyhawk given how frequently prominent Greyhawk NPCs have been popping up in the official material.

The only reason I'm doubtful about Greyhawk is that I don't think it looks sufficiently different enough at a glance to the layman from FR to receive a lot of sales. While bringing back old settings is clearly an appeal to old fans, they still want new fans to buy it. I could be wrong, for a variety of reasons, but it's crossed my mind a few times

[JackPhoenix]

I think there's a decent chance for Greyhawk given how frequently prominent Greyhawk NPCs have been popping up in the official material.

Ghost of Saltmarch showed they are aware of settings other than FR, and we've got both Mordenkainen and Tasha on splatbook covers, so that's plausible. Add all the Spelljammer stuff, and Spelljammer itself is more interesting than Planescape (which is more detail on stuff that's already present in PHB, i.e. the planes) and Ravenloft being pretty much confirmed....

I still hope for surprise Dark Sun, though.

[x3n0n]

I think there's a decent chance for Greyhawk given how frequently prominent Greyhawk NPCs have been popping up in the official material.

I listened to the last "Sage Advice" podcast segment this morning, and JC name-dropped Greyhawk as one of the settings to which one could adapt various group patrons.

[Sigreid]

The only reason I'm doubtful about Greyhawk is that I don't think it looks sufficiently different enough at a glance to the layman from FR to receive a lot of sales. While bringing back old settings is clearly an appeal to old fans, they still want new fans to buy it. I could be wrong, for a variety of reasons, but it's crossed my mind a few times

As I said, I was just thinking of how they keep using original Greyhawk characters pop up. I actually think it would be a good thing not just because I'm old enough to remember the setting, but it's a setting they can offer that doesn't have all the baggage FR currently has (time of troubles, spell plague, etc.).

[rooneg]

There’s also just the fact that the average person in Krynn doesn’t have any real understanding of what the details of the wizards of high sorcery are. A Wizard is a Wizard to them. The whole deal with the three moons and whatnot isn’t public info at all, the black moon that powers the magic of the black robes isn’t visible to the naked eye and is basically unknown.

Also, another example that just occurred to me. In places that did have more knowledge of magic and how the orders operated we see at least one example of a black robe wizard being cast out. Dalamar was explicitly expelled from Silvanesti when he was discovered to have studied dark magic and pledged himself to Nuitari. This was before he took the test and became an official black robe wizard, but it’s pretty clear that the elves saw where he was headed and wanted none of that around.

[JackPhoenix]

Also, another example that just occurred to me. In places that did have more knowledge of magic and how the orders operated we see at least one example of a black robe wizard being cast out. Dalamar was explicitly expelled from Silvanesti when he was discovered to have studied dark magic and pledged himself to Nuitari. This was before he took the test and became an official black robe wizard, but it’s pretty clear that the elves saw where he was headed and wanted none of that around.

That's because the elves firmly seen themselves in the Good camp and only accepted the white order. Dalamar would be kicked out if he ended up as a red wizard too.

[rooneg]

That's because the elves firmly seen themselves in the Good camp and only accepted the white order. Dalamar would be kicked out if he ended up as a red wizard too.

I mean, it's also somewhat more complicated than that with the elves, IIRC there was some sort of "you must be of this high a social caste to learn the cool magic" sort of thing going on with him. But still, it does show that at least some societies in Krynn did have particular opinions about which types of wizards were okay, it wasn't just "sure, go hang out over there in your black robe doing your necromancy" all over the place.

[IsaacsAlterEgo]

I think with Kender...

Steal would indicate an intent to keep by removing it from another person.

A Kender is more often, simply borrowing the item. Because when it's called for or needed, they more often than not simply say, "Oh, you must have dropped it." And return the item.

If one was stealing it, they wouldn't surrender the item over and be more like, "Hey, I think Bob over there was rifling through your bags while we were sleeping - maybe he has your magic ring, Gol' ol' buddy?" (All the while, fondling said golden ring that makes you invisible in your pocket).

If you take something from somebody without their consent, that's definitely theft, regardless of what your intentions are afterwards. They might forgive you if you had particularly good justifications, but it's still theft.

If Kender are ever put into 5e it will be the first race I ever ban from my games. They are the "rogue steals from the party and then lies about it" problem personified into a race. Having lying to/stealing from your friends being encouraged in a cooperative game is a choice I'll never quite understand. I can't even imagine a party realistically keeping a Kender around after they've pulled their "steal the Fighter's most prized possession then lie and say they dropped it when you are caught" once, nevermind repeatedly.

[gloryblaze]

If you take something from somebody without their consent, that's definitely theft, regardless of what your intentions are afterwards. They might forgive you if you had particularly good justifications, but it's still theft.


Not quite, at least not in all jurisdictions. Intent to deprive is typically necessary to prove criminal theft. For example, here's an excerpt from Arizona's theft statute:


.
A person commits theft if, without lawful authority, the person knowingly:

1. Controls property of another with the intent to deprive the other person of such property;



Notice how "intent to deprive" is necessary. This is often called "mens rea", or "guilty mind." If you take someone else's property with no intent to deprive them of that property (such as if you intend to give it back upon demand), you will likely not be guilty of theft.

Of course, if you take someone else's property without permission but intend to return it, you may still be civilly liable to them for the tort known as conversion.

[KorvinStarmast]

I think there's a decent chance for Greyhawk given how frequently prominent Greyhawk NPCs have been popping up in the official material. The Saltmarsh book was a nice teaser, if that's going to happen. *crosses fingers* There's a wealth of mid to high level adventure potential in the eastern half of the world in the Great Kingdom ...

If you take something from somebody without their consent, that's definitely theft, regardless of what your intentions are afterwards. They might forgive you if you had particularly good justifications, but it's still theft.

If Kender are ever put into 5e it will be the first race I ever ban from my games. That's two of us.

(The rest of that part of your post did a nice job of describing what I was alluding to with the term 'grief play' - which term I learned during on line gaming)

[JadedDM]

Kender wouldn't steal 'your most prized possession'. A kender borrows things like colorful feathers, shiny rocks, cool widgets. They don't care about gold or jewels. So it's important to remember when talking about a kender 'taking your stuff, then claiming you dropped it,' the things being taken are more like an embroidered handkerchief, a shiny signet ring or a partially melted coin. Not the fighter's +2 long sword or the wizard's wand of magic missiles.

[Sigreid]

Kender wouldn't steal 'your most prized possession'. A kender borrows things like colorful feathers, shiny rocks, cool widgets. They don't care about gold or jewels. So it's important to remember when talking about a kender 'taking your stuff, then claiming you dropped it,' the things being taken are more like an embroidered handkerchief, a shiny signet ring or a partially melted coin. Not the fighter's +2 long sword or the wizard's wand of magic missiles.

Still wouldn't blame anyone for murdering them.

[IsaacsAlterEgo]

Kender wouldn't steal 'your most prized possession'. A kender borrows things like colorful feathers, shiny rocks, cool widgets. They don't care about gold or jewels. So it's important to remember when talking about a kender 'taking your stuff, then claiming you dropped it,' the things being taken are more like an embroidered handkerchief, a shiny signet ring or a partially melted coin. Not the fighter's +2 long sword or the wizard's wand of magic missiles.

Just because a character is a fighter doesn't mean their most prized possession has to be a really good sword. The fighter could for example, have a ring with extreme sentimental value.

Furthermore, "cool widgets" describes a truckload of magical items in the game, so it's not like kender aren't compelled to steal things of consequence. And regardless of WHAT they are taking, the fact that they are routinely taking from other party members and lying about it makes them a massive liability. Would you hang out with someone who every time you spend time they come over your house, they swipe a random trinket and lie (and maintain that lie) every time when they are caught? Now could you imagine putting your life into that persons hands?

[Fumble Jack]

Since they're doing a Forgotten Realms expansion in the magic card game, might be a safe bet they'll do another official Magic setting, maybe Zendikar since that's popular on the magic side as one of the 3 books. I'd like to see Datk Sun but still not convinced it may be a thing yet.

[ProsecutorGodot]

Kender wouldn't steal 'your most prized possession'. A kender borrows things like colorful feathers, shiny rocks, cool widgets. They don't care about gold or jewels. So it's important to remember when talking about a kender 'taking your stuff, then claiming you dropped it,' the things being taken are more like an embroidered handkerchief, a shiny signet ring or a partially melted coin. Not the fighter's +2 long sword or the wizard's wand of magic missiles.

I'm coming in from a perspective of not being at all knowledgeable on what a Kender was before this... I already don't like them.

I don't really care what you're taking, why do you need to take any of my things? It seems like an excuse to just be taking things from people for no reason other than "it's what I do, why are you mad, it was just that thing you had that was yours." and having even the room for them to be snatching beyond trinkets and baubles is even more confounding.

If the identity of them can be defined accurately as "I take your stuff because I can" then I'd rather not put up with it, because not every player is going to be the starry eyed kender who is actually out for fun, it's a case where even if the majority of it is harmless the minority of problems it enables far outstrips that.

Besides all that, the bit of research that I did to try and bring myself up to speed makes them out to be pathological liars who would not honestly give up what they've stolen unless you coerce them into it.

I've never played with one, and I've never known about them in detail before today and I already dislike them heavily.

[JadedDM]

Would you hang out with someone who every time you spend time they come over your house, they swipe a random trinket and lie (and maintain that lie) every time when they are caught? Now could you imagine putting your life into that persons hands?

They aren't being deceptive. They honestly believe that they are returning an item to you that you lost. There's no maliciousness involved. The kender gets distracted by something they think looks cool, pick it up, get bored with it, absently drop it in their pouches and forget about it until it's brought up again.

It's ironic, in a way, people keep trying to label kender as thieving jerks, because the whole reason for their creation was Tracey Hickman didn't like the idea of halfling thieves who maliciously steal things from people, so he came up with kender handlers as a way around that.

[MrStabby]

I think that there is an issue of "rights" here.

If my character owns something there is a legitimate expectation that they control some aspect of it. Some kind of right of determination of property.

If I am a wizard, I should expect to chose what to write in my spell book - no PC should use a class ability to cause me, without my consent, to happen to scribe a different spell in my book by mistake.

If I have a pebble collection from the beaches of some distant land, I collected it and, barring DM intervention which is a different matter, should be able to say where on my personal it is stored.

It isnt about not having my stuff, it's about not getting to take my place at the table determining how my stuff plays out in the game.

[diplomancer]

I think that there is an issue of "rights" here.

If my character owns something there is a legitimate expectation that they control some aspect of it. Some kind of right of determination of property.

If I am a wizard, I should expect to chose what to write in my spell book - no PC should use a class ability to cause me, without my consent, to happen to scribe a different spell in my book by mistake.

If I have a pebble collection from the beaches of some distant land, I collected it and, barring DM intervention which is a different matter, should be able to say where on my personal it is stored.

It isnt about not having my stuff, it's about not getting to take my place at the table determining how my stuff plays out in the game.

The odd things about Kender is, though they were created with a game in mind, they work far better in a book (where they "just exist", it's not their fault and everyone in the world knows that) than in the gaming table (where, if they exist, it's because a player CHOSE to be one, and is responsible for whatever grief is inflicted on the other players by his character.)

That said, a memorable character in one of my campaigns was an old, half-senile Cleric who kept trying (and almost always failing) to pick the pockets of the rest of the Party.

[IsaacsAlterEgo]

They aren't being deceptive. They honestly believe that they are returning an item to you that you lost. There's no maliciousness involved. The kender gets distracted by something they think looks cool, pick it up, get bored with it, absently drop it in their pouches and forget about it until it's brought up again.

It's ironic, in a way, people keep trying to label kender as thieving jerks, because the whole reason for their creation was Tracey Hickman didn't like the idea of halfling thieves who maliciously steal things from people, so he came up with kender handlers as a way around that.

Whether it's deliberate or not, the end result is that they're committing a crime and telling an untruth when confronted with it, and will always repeat this behavior. That's a huge liability, and not someone I'd be willing to take with me in a life-or-death situation, especially not on a regular basis. In fact if they're completely incapable of understanding their own actions, and they essentially act like children... Shouldn't they be relegated to something akin to a care facility, rather than going out and about getting into fights?

Not to mention in a meta way, the player who has chosen to play as a kender *is* making a deliberate decision to be a deceptive thief. They can't just wash their hands of it and say "This is what my character would do!", they decided to make the choice to play a kleptomaniac who is pathologically incapable of understanding that they are a kleptomaniac. As stated before, it's essentially a way to grief the party in games where the other players can't just say "Okay, we leave Stealy the Kender at the inn and ride off without him, hoping never to see him again".

[KorvinStarmast]

The odd things about Kender is, though they were created with a game in mind, they work far better in a book They were an awfully clumsy attempt to craft a hobbit for an adventuring party without it being a hobbit.
Not to mention in a meta way, the player who has chosen to play as a kender *is* making a deliberate decision to be a deceptive thief. They can't just wash their hands of it and say "This is what my character would do!", They can try, but it usually doesn't end well. (I agree with your post)

[Brookshw]

They aren't being deceptive. They honestly believe that they are returning an item to you that you lost. There's no maliciousness involved. The kender gets distracted by something they think looks cool, pick it up, get bored with it, absently drop it in their pouches and forget about it until it's brought up again.


Of course, those "found" items may have very well been in your pockets to begin with, I don't know that the absent minded thief is better than the....intentional (?) thief.

Back to the topic at hand, I noticed an article (https://www.geeknative.com/96553/power-rangers-d-g-i-joe-transformers-and-my-little-pony-games-planned/) today about about a Power Rangers, GI Joe and My Little Pony game which appear to be using the D&D system, watch those be the campaigns and the rest is a giant trolling.

[Spriteless]

Back to the topic at hand, I noticed an article (https://www.geeknative.com/96553/power-rangers-d-g-i-joe-transformers-and-my-little-pony-games-planned/) today about about a Power Rangers, GI Joe and My Little Pony game which appear to be using the D&D system, watch those be the campaigns and the rest is a giant trolling.

Wow. My Little Pony is the one that needs the fewest changes to fit the system. Though GI Joe could be a more flavorful D20 modern.

This actually reminds me of when everything had a D20 version, or when Call of Cthuhlu and Rune Quest from Chaosium had the same D100 system some years earlier.

[Sigreid]

Wow. My Little Pony is the one that needs the fewest changes to fit the system. Though GI Joe could be a more flavorful D20 modern.

This actually reminds me of when everything had a D20 version, or when Call of Cthuhlu and Rune Quest from Chaosium had the same D100 system some years earlier.

There's a webcomic that a few years back had a bit about the characters making rules for My Little Pony when I guess it was announced that all the ponies were princesses. Pretty much all I know about My Little Pony is from that joke and that they are allegedly horses of some kind.

[Tawmis]

The only reason I'm doubtful about Greyhawk is that I don't think it looks sufficiently different enough at a glance to the layman from FR to receive a lot of sales. While bringing back old settings is clearly an appeal to old fans, they still want new fans to buy it. I could be wrong, for a variety of reasons, but it's crossed my mind a few times

Here's the thing. Do you think folks don't get enjoyment out of the MCU movies when they make nods to actual comic covers, scenes, etc?

The thing is, if you're not familiar with it (whether it be Greyhawk or a specific scene, done that's clearly a nod to a specific comic cover) - it doesn't take away from anyone. It allows those that are familiar with it to appreciate it and enjoy it, while those not familiar with it will take it at face value as something new.

It's not like they'd say "Greyhawk is now 5e" and provide no lore, stats, etc. They would go into depth about it. People would either just embrace it as something new (akin to Ebberon) or be joyful for the older folks (like myself) to see something we recognize from "back in the day."



If you take something from somebody without their consent, that's definitely theft, regardless of what your intentions are afterwards. They might forgive you if you had particularly good justifications, but it's still theft.

If Kender are ever put into 5e it will be the first race I ever ban from my games. They are the "rogue steals from the party and then lies about it" problem personified into a race. Having lying to/stealing from your friends being encouraged in a cooperative game is a choice I'll never quite understand. I can't even imagine a party realistically keeping a Kender around after they've pulled their "steal the Fighter's most prized possession then lie and say they dropped it when you are caught" once, nevermind repeatedly.

If your player (if it was allowed) was stealing things and denying it, then they're not playing the (traditional) Kender correctly.


They were an awfully clumsy attempt to craft a hobbit for an adventuring party without it being a hobbit. They can try, but it usually doesn't end well. (I agree with your post)

For someone who said they didn't want to discuss Dragonlance anymore, you sure do have a lot of opinions about it.
As for a lazy attempt at a Hobbit, I would differ - as someone who read all the books and didn't just play a module and not make it through the first (or second?) book.
When I played a Dragonlance specific campaign (taking place after Chronicles and not a module), I played a Kender. And it was never about stealing or hoarding. It was more about - imagine an entire race that has the curiosity and often times childlike fearlessness - to do and try different things. That's what a Kender is. A Hobbit is very much the opposite. A Hobbit wants to sit in their hobbit hole, smoking their pipes, enjoying the sunrise. Very much the opposite of a Hobbit in every regard.

The only relation to "Hobbits" would be their "size." But then, why not say they're dwarves or gnomes? Because they're the same size too.

[Sigreid]

For someone who said they didn't want to discuss Dragonlance anymore, you sure do have a lot of opinions about it.
As for a lazy attempt at a Hobbit, I would differ - as someone who read all the books and didn't just play a module and not make it through the first (or second?) book.
When I played a Dragonlance specific campaign (taking place after Chronicles and not a module), I played a Kender. And it was never about stealing or hoarding. It was more about - imagine an entire race that has the curiosity and often times childlike fearlessness - to do and try different things. That's what a Kender is. A Hobbit is very much the opposite. A Hobbit wants to sit in their hobbit hole, smoking their pipes, enjoying the sunrise. Very much the opposite of a Hobbit in every regard.

The only relation to "Hobbits" would be their "size." But then, why not say they're dwarves or gnomes? Because they're the same size too.

Yep. Kinder is even just German for child, hence kindergarten which is literally child garden. Basically it's adventuring with a person with the skill competence of an adult and the mindset of a 5 year old. And this does also mean that they are capable of not touching what they know is really important to you.

[KorvinStarmast]

As for a lazy attempt at a Hobbit, I would differ - as someone who read all the books and didn't just play a module and not make it through the first (or second?) book.
You do not seem to have understood my post
I read around a dozen dragon lance books. Maybe a few more than a dozen.
The first series as they came out.
The twins trilogy. Some of the one-offs (there was one with Kit and Tannis I vaguely recall, but I also think that some of the books were written by others who weren't MW or TH ... it's been a long time)
What I didn't do was read any of them a second time. Things I have read a second time like Forgotten Beasts of Eld, Starship Troopers, Hobbit, LoTR, Hobb's Assassin series, etc, are books that I really like.
The DL books that I owned I donated to the ship's library when I left that assignment.

As to the modules: we played the first one. The second one (and the rest which I picked up later) never left their wrapper.

As more books came out, I'd had enough of them and didn't bother. (I also cut way back on D&D and related material in the 90's, AD&D 2e time, as we were having kids and that hobby wasn't in the picture.
IIRC, DL was still pretty big in AD&D 2e, but the other settings appealed to me more: planescape and darksun)

Hmm, I just remembered another piece of the DL world building / annoying fiddly bits, that bugged me: steel coins. It was (for my tastes) a much worse variant that M.A.R. Barker's metal poor Tekumel world where clenh hide armor was more common that metal armor, and metal(steel) was a very valuable commodity.

I liked the Deathgate cycle but didn't keep those books either.

[PhoenixPhyre]

You do not seem to have understood my post
I read around a dozen dragon lance books. Maybe a few more than a dozen.
The first series as they came out.
The twins trilogy. Some of the one-offs (there was one with Kit and Tannis I vaguely recall, but I also think that some of the books were written by others who weren't MW or TH ... it's been a long time)
What I didn't do was read any of them a second time. Things I have read a second time like Starship Troopers, Hobbit, LoTR, Hobb's Assassin series, etc, are books that I really like.
The DL books that I owned I donated to the ship's library when I left that assignment.

As to the modules: we played the first one. The second one (and the rest which I picked up later) never left their wrapper.

As more books came out, I'd had enough of them and didn't bother.
(I just remembered another piece of the world building / annoying fiddly bits, that bugged me: steel coins).

I liked the Deathgate cycle but didn't keep those books either.

Yeah. That's how I felt about 90% of the stuff from Hickmann & Weis. Ok-ish to read once (I have really low standards for that :smallbiggrin:), but not something I'd keep around and re-read (I have much higher standards for that). Or have any interest in actually playing in those worlds. The worlds just didn't grab me at all.

[KorvinStarmast]

For Twamis: I guess I'm being Debbie Downer here, and for me the Kender is the deal breaker. So yeah, I need to stop.

Plenty of people really enjoy/enjoyed that setting.

[Sigreid]

For Twamis: I guess I'm being Debbie Downer here, and for me the Kender is the deal breaker. So yeah, I need to stop.

Plenty of people really enjoy/enjoyed that setting.

That's ok, the deal breaker for me is the whole towers of high sorcery thing. I don't play a wizard so I can have 1/3 of the spells off limits.

[IsaacsAlterEgo]

Kender have a lot of problems (at least, ones that I can't really get past. Let's not even get into the problems behind the existence of half kender...) but I don't think they're the only issue. Gully dwarves are Dragonlance as well, correct? I believe they are also one of the most widely despised races. To me their depiction from what I know is rather...cruel and mean spirited. They apparently cannot count as well as some real life animals? And then there's the tinker gnomes, which I know very little of but have heard nothing but complaints about. Does anyone have a more positive take on them?

Dragonlance seems to just have a lot of baggage as a setting that for 5th would have to be changed pretty extensively or left out entirely, which feels like more work than WotC is typically willing to put into their settings. I figure they will probably end up including Grayhawk over it, as the two setting do seem somewhat similar.

Personally, I'm hoping for Planescape, Spelljammer and Darksun. They feel the most "different" to me; Grawhawk and Dragonlance feel, in my opinion, very similar to Forgotten Realms and I don't feel like there is a lot you can do in those settings that you absolutely couldn't make work in forgotten realms.

[rooneg]

Kender have a lot of problems (at least, ones that I can't really get past. Let's not even get into the problems behind the existence of half kender...) but I don't think they're the only issue. Gully dwarves are Dragonlance as well, correct? I believe they are also one of the most widely despised races. To me their depiction from what I know is rather...cruel and mean spirited. They apparently cannot count as well as some real life animals? And then there's the tinker gnomes, which I know very little of but have heard nothing but complaints about. Does anyone have a more positive take on them?

I can't imagine Gully Dwarves actually existing in any modern version of Dragonlance. They'd literally be the first thing to cut for me, even before Kender.

As for Tinker Gnomes, I actually like them, but they do require the party to be willing to add a certain amount of humor to their game. Not everyone wants to play that style of game though.

[Hael]

Yeah. That's how I felt about 90% of the stuff from Hickmann & Weis. Ok-ish to read once (I have really low standards for that :smallbiggrin:), but not something I'd keep around and re-read (I have much higher standards for that). Or have any interest in actually playing in those worlds. The worlds just didn't grab me at all.

The problem with DL, is the setting is pretty much a plot device to frame the memorable characters. So while Weis and Hickman did create some of fantasies more iconic characters, it makes for a pretty limited setting for a campaign.

Conversely, Darksun isn’t really defined by its characters and it’s more about the setting. This of course makes for a much easier place to create a story.

[Arkhios]

Kender are fine as long as people who play them don't over-do their kleptomaniac nature.

I'd be interested in a Dragonlance setting. The novel series were my first I read of the genre, even though I remember only bits from here and there.

Back when 5e Unearthed Arcana articles were a new thing, IIRC there was this one article that spoke of introducing alternative racial traits to some races, especially making a variant dragonborn for draconians for Dragonlance piqued my interest. Obviously replacing their breath weapon with something more fitting for the various draconian types.

[KorvinStarmast]

Conversely, Darksun isn’t really defined by its characters and it’s more about the setting. This of course makes for a much easier place to create a story. Which is why I like it. :smallsmile:
Kender are fine as long as people who play them don't over-do their kleptomaniac nature. Which is the problem, isn't it? Structurally enabling grief play in a cooperative role playing game is bad game design. It took a while playing on line games for me to understand that.

[Fnissalot]

I can't imagine Gully Dwarves actually existing in any modern version of Dragonlance. They'd literally be the first thing to cut for me, even before Kender.

As for Tinker Gnomes, I actually like them, but they do require the party to be willing to add a certain amount of humor to their game. Not everyone wants to play that style of game though.

I personally think the best example of gully dwarfs are the podlings in the dark crystal universe and wouldn't need to be cut if done that way. Small cute beings that enjoy partying. That said, I only read through some of the dragonlance modules and played parts of the computer games. I haven't touched the books.

Tinker gnomes are more or less rock gnomes, right? What is the problem with that?

[JadedDM]

I can't imagine Gully Dwarves actually existing in any modern version of Dragonlance. They'd literally be the first thing to cut for me, even before Kender.

I'd agree that gully dwarves are...incredibly problematic, to say the least. But you wouldn't need to cut them, just reflavor them. Give them a big CON boost and make them immune to non-magical disease. Now, the reason they live in refuse and eat garbage isn't that they are too stupid to know better, it's because they can. Why bother bathing, cooking their food or otherwise practicing hygiene when there's no downside to not doing so?

Rather than being pathetically cowardly, they are just conflict-adverse because they don't see any need to fight over land, resources or ideals. They live and let live. They're fine surviving in ruins or sewers or other places the so-called 'civilized' races consider unlivable, because nobody bothers them there. But if you threaten them, they go ballistic. Essentially, make them the honey badgers of dwarvenkind.

[Arkhios]

Which is the problem, isn't it? Structurally enabling grief play in a cooperative role playing game is bad game design. It took a while playing on line games for me to understand that.

Ehh, it's only a problem if you make a problem out of it.

Same could be said about a rogue whose player over-does the class' larcenist behaviour.

Or a warlock whose player plays it as evil as it goes, as a Chaotic Idiot.

Or an obstinate, lawful stupid paladin with a one-inch-wide worldview and moral code.

The list goes on...

[Corsair14]

I never had a problem with Kender in my games. When I ran it I would randomly have items that the kender picked up in his day to day travels with the group and often from the group. I would remind the player he was playing an innocent klepto that generally doesnt even know he picked anything up. Kind of like how people mindlessly click pens and dont even realize it until someone nearby calls them on it. Many times a player would go to use something and it wasnt there and they would look at the kender and he would go oh yeah, this? I would generate his pouch contents depending on where they were, in town or just the party, and would pick a few items that would be found in those environments. Sticks, sling bullet, healing potion, for example.

Gully Dwarves are just stupid dwarves. They are afraid of everything, take nothing serious unless it looks scary, have very little situational awareness and no short term memory. While I didnt restrict them, I find they dont make a very good playing character race. I think they had a max intelligence of 8?

Tinker gnomes are awesome. Always working on some kind of crazy device. It requires a very imaginative player to properly play one. I am strong into racial traits and people playing them correctly. Even the most sensible tinker gnome is working on something and the less complicated it is, the less useful or impressive it is. "Oh, just an auto-hitting axe? How about we have it shoot steam too?"

I really recommend people read some of the less major books to see some of the off-races of Dragonlance and how they should be run. Flint the King is a great one for seeing an indepth look at gully dwarves. There is a Spelljammer novel that goes into detail on the Tinker Gnomes, I think it was the first book of Cloakmaster series? For the Draconians, because i am in full favor of them being player races, Doom Brigade and its sequel are awesome reads into the mindsets of the various draconian races.

[JadedDM]

Tinker gnomes are more or less rock gnomes, right? What is the problem with that?
Not exactly. Tinker Gnomes are inventors, dedicated to science and technology. However, they have been cursed with a lack of caution or basic safety. In their minds, a machine that actually does what it is supposed to do can't be improved upon, which means it's pointless. So they are constantly adding bells and whistles, which ultimately makes their inventions useless. Gnomish weapons are as likely to hurt the user than the enemy. Instead of stairs or elevators, they have 'gnome-flingers' which are basically catapults that fling people up to the floor they want (it's more efficient, they argue). That sort of thing.

Also, they speak hilariously fast and have names that take several minutes to recite because they are so long. Most of them live in a hollowed out volcano called Mt. Nevermind. It got its name when someone asked them what their home is called, and after several minutes of listening to the name, they interrupted and said, "Never mind, Never mind!" and the gnomes adopted it as the new name.

There's also a 1% chance any gnome born will be immune to the curse, meaning they can actually invent things that work the way they are supposed to. They are called Thinker Gnomes, although the other Tinker Gnomes refer to them as 'Mad Gnomes.' Because creating a device and then saying, "Yes, this is good enough. I don't need to do any more to it," is surely madness, as far as they are concerned.

[KorvinStarmast]

Ehh, it's only a problem if you make a problem out of it. I may not have been clear about the game design bit. On a related note, the initial functionality of Town Portal in Diablo II was a failed game design that enabled grief play by those who get their kicks PKing people in public games. It took more than one patch to fix that structural failure.

Kender are a conceptual game design failure (if not as big of a world building failure as I think they are) in that they structurally enable the chaotic idiot you referred to.

And I am sure that at various tables they have harmoniously fitted into a group of people who played them like ... halflings. :smallwink:

I think we can agree that some of the structural problems with paladin ( a class, not a race) were fixed in this edition.

[Fnissalot]

I
Gully Dwarves are just stupid dwarves. They are afraid of everything, take nothing serious unless it looks scary, have very little situational awareness and no short term memory. While I didnt restrict them, I find they dont make a very good playing character race. I think they had a max intelligence of 8?

I really recommend people read some of the less major books to see some of the off-races of Dragonlance and how they should be run. Flint the King is a great one for seeing an indepth look at gully dwarves. There is a Spelljammer novel that goes into detail on the Tinker Gnomes, I think it was the first book of Cloakmaster series? For the Draconians, because i am in full favor of them being player races, Doom Brigade and its sequel are awesome reads into the mindsets of the various draconian races.

The thing with 5e is that the playable races doesn't need to represent the majority of the race. Centaurs and minotaurs tends to be large but playable ones are medium. PCs tend to be heroes and the 4d6 drop the lowest enforces that and they are beginning to remove negative stat mods from orcs and such. I could totally see a gully dwarfs who is brave and wants to join a knightly order and runs around hitting things he deems evil with a kitchen utensil. When I have ran a homebrew dragonlance campaign in 5e, I ran gully dwarfs similar to podlings in the dark crystal universe and my players enjoyed them while being slightly disgusted. If you want to make them a playable character, you would bend them into having saving graces and being driven enough to go on adventures, not just enforce their disregard for sanitation, their cowardice, and their low intelligence.

[Luccan]

The thing with 5e is that the playable races doesn't need to represent the majority of the race. Centaurs and minotaurs tends to be large but playable ones are medium. PCs tend to be heroes and the 4d6 drop the lowest enforces that and they are beginning to remove negative stat mods from orcs and such. I could totally see a gully dwarfs who is brave and wants to join a knightly order and runs around hitting things he deems evil with a kitchen utensil. When I have ran a homebrew dragonlance campaign in 5e, I ran gully dwarfs similar to podlings in the dark crystal universe and my players enjoyed them while being slightly disgusted. If you want to make them a playable character, you would bend them into having saving graces and being driven enough to go on adventures, not just enforce their disregard for sanitation, their cowardice, and their low intelligence.
The PC equivalents for Minotaur and centaur are written for settings where they are the standard.

[Devils_Advocate]

If your player (if it was allowed) was stealing things and denying it, then they're not playing the (traditional) Kender correctly.



Kender appropriate absolutely anything that catches their eye. Physical boundaries or notions of privacy are both alien concepts to them
Kender are never happier than when their hands are in the pockets, pouches, or backpacks of those around them.
Kender always give perfectly reasonable explanations for just about every accusation leveled at them. Favorites include:

"It must have fallen into my pocket."

"You dropped it. I picked it up so I could give it back."

"I was just keeping it safe. You never know when someone might try to steal it."

"I forgot I had it. Is it yours?"

"What a coincidence! I have one just like that."

"Didn't you mean to give this to me as a gift?"
- DragonLance Campaign Setting, 3rd Edition, page 28

Now, those aren't all denials of taking the purloined item, but some of them are. And assuming that the kender only has reason to believe that the fourth response above is true, it seems like kender are honest about their handling an estimated 17% of the time. Somehow, that doesn't strike me as terribly innocent.

If kender don't realize that they tend to end up with others' belongings as a result of their favorite pastime of rifling through everyone's stuff, then they're basically delusional in a way that impairs their ability to interact well with others.

I'm curious how kender tend to react to requests not to rifle through everyone's stuff. Surely people ask that of them from time to time?


As for a lazy attempt at a Hobbit, I would differ - as someone who read all the books and didn't just play a module and not make it through the first (or second?) book.
When I played a Dragonlance specific campaign (taking place after Chronicles and not a module), I played a Kender. And it was never about stealing or hoarding. It was more about - imagine an entire race that has the curiosity and often times childlike fearlessness - to do and try different things. That's what a Kender is. A Hobbit is very much the opposite. A Hobbit wants to sit in their hobbit hole, smoking their pipes, enjoying the sunrise. Very much the opposite of a Hobbit in every regard.

The only relation to "Hobbits" would be their "size." But then, why not say they're dwarves or gnomes? Because they're the same size too.
Why would anyone ever think to compare a small player character race geared towards the Thief class with another small player character race geared towards the Thief class? The twist with hobbits is that they very much tend to be the opposite of adventurers, but OH MY GOODNESS THIS ONE IS AN ADVENTURER, JUST LIKE EVERY OTHER HOBBIT PC, WHAT A SURPRISE! Whereas the twist with kender is that they have a form of racial insanity that makes them think that they aren't thieves even though they actually steal stuff all the time, OH HA HA HOW FUNNY! Those are totally different twists, which obviously makes hobbits and kender completely different! Why, you might as well compare the unimposing little sneaky non-magical race to the unimposing sneaky little magical race, which is clearly absurd.

The twist with kender via-à-vis hobbits is that they're naturally adventurous, in contrast to hobbits who are naturally non-adventurous. But they're designed for and tend to fill the same party role. So kender player characters as a group serve as a foil to hobbit player characters as a group. Hence, a kender is "a hobbit for an adventuring party without it being a hobbit". (It seems like you may have missed the underlined part of Korvin's post). Gnomes, on the other hand, tend to slot into a different sort of class... but in a functionally halfling-like sort of way. An Illusionist turning invisible and a Rogue hiding in the shadows are both being sneaky, just in different ways. So gnomes could be considered a foil of sorts to halflings as well.

Dwarves, on the other other hand, really do not seem to have much in common with halfling other than being short. Physically, they tend to be stockier and beardier and manlier and are much more likely to be heavy-armor-wearing front-line melee combatants. They're stubborn and industrious. They share no role with hobbits, and so are not a foil.


Kender are fine as long as people who play them don't over-do their kleptomaniac nature.
Hopefully this anecdote doesn't drag this discussion too far off track, but... I remember once seeing a thread on another board about why people don't like the Forgotten Realms. And a Realms apologist responded by saying that powerful NPCs dominating the setting was something that could be ignored in play. But the thing is, all of its significant high-level characters and divine intervention and whatnot seem to be what differentiate the Forgotten Realms from an utterly generic D&D setting. So that defense kind of adds up to "The Forgotten Realms is fine so long as you ignore the stuff that makes it so gosh-darned Forgotten Reamsy."

Kender have been described as "childlike". Another applicable term might be "immature". And I get the impression that their acquisitive tendencies aren't the only potential problem. They're also fearless and have a proclivity for taunting. The impression I get is that insulting a temperamental giant because the giant is being kind of a jerk would not be out of character. Of course, if the giant only gets mad at the kender, and the rest of the party is happy to let the giant squash the kender by this point, then maybe this is one of those cases where certain problems eventually take care of themselves. But until that happens, they have to put up with a teammate easily distracted by shiny objects.

I'm sure that it's possible for a player to work around basically everything about kender in order to play a kender who isn't too poorly behaved. I'm also sure that that's damning kender with faint "praise". If the best that can be said in their defense is "The kender aren't so bad if you downplay all the stuff that makes them so gosh-darned kendery", maybe that's a bad sign.

The Thief (sub)class is totally also a potential problem, because the category of characters who steal obviously includes characters who steal from their own companions. But it doesn't only include them, so players and DMs who take issue with PCs stealing from other PCs are only taking issue with how a player is playing a thief, not with playing thieves in general. When characters of some race, or class, or alignment, or whatever can't not steal from their companions, and that whatever is supposed to be a valid character option, then there is a valid character option with those PVP antics baked in.

Now, that's not necessarily a problem. Some groups are okay with PVP. And some DMs will say "No PVP, and therefore no kender". But unless a clear stance is taken on this matter, there is great potential for misaligned expectations. And part of why dealing with this issue up front is less than 100% standard practice is that a lot of the time, those misaligned expectations just don't wind up coming up. If some players assume that PVP play isn't okay, and others assume that it is okay, and yet the latter players never have any reason to have their characters take any action against other player characters, there is no resultant conflict.

Kender are a case where a player who otherwise wouldn't cause problems can wind up annoying other players because a type of annoying behavior is effectively endorsed by being part of an option for player characters, and the player assumes that that means it's fine. Like Evil alignment, kender would seem to at least warrant a warning label to the effect of "Hey. It can be hard to roleplay this in a way that doesn't spoil others' enjoyment of the game, so you might want to consider just not picking this. If you do, have a discussion with your group about what's expected of players and what is and isn't acceptable. Dungeons & Dragons is generally a cooperative game, so player characters need to be able to cooperate with each other unless a group decides to discard the default assumption of cooperation."


It's ironic, in a way, people keep trying to label kender as thieving jerks, because the whole reason for their creation was Tracey Hickman didn't like the idea of halfling thieves who maliciously steal things from people, so he came up with kender handlers as a way around that.
How many thieves are motivated by malice, rather than simple greed? The issue is that some thefts are inordinately likely to be motivated by player malice. Replacing greed with outright kleptomania encourages thefts of that nature. Now there's always an in-character reason to steal even when there's no practical benefit to doing so! The "best" roleplaying excuse for antisocial behavior is one that's "always-on".

[KorvinStarmast]

Tracey Hickman didn't like the idea of halfling thieves who maliciously steal things from people Which would make Tracy an idiot if Kender is how he solved that perceived problem. And I don't think Tracy Hickman is an idiot.

[JadedDM]

Which would make Tracy an idiot if Kender is how he solved that perceived problem. And I don't think Tracy Hickman is an idiot.
Are you saying I made it up? It's in their wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kender_(Dragonlance)) page, the source being from The Annotated Chronicles.


Two of the other key characteristics of kender—their curiosity and kleptomania—were introduced by Hickman.[4][6] Hickman was uncomfortable with the notion of a "race of thieves" in his games, but still wanted the skills typically associated with thieves, so he added their "innocent tendency to 'borrow' things for indeterminate periods of time."[3]

[Trafalgar]

Bad news: All three settings are different versions of the Forgotten Realms, all set during different time periods

Back when Dark Sun came out in '91, I was convinced that it was the Forgotten Realms, just 2000 or 3000 years in the future. I believed this because "Tyr" was both a god in Forgotten Realms and a City in Dark Sun. I thought that TSR was going to roll out some massive magical/psionic apocalypse that would kill Elminister, banish the FR Gods, and turn Faerun into a desert.

Dark Sun was such a radical departure from the rest of 2e. It "fixed" a lot of 2e's RAW problems and was such a different flavor than the earlier settings that it felt like a different TTRPG. So I really hope they do the same with a 5e Dark Sun.

I also hope that Planescape returns.

[ProsecutorGodot]

Are you saying I made it up? It's in their wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kender_(Dragonlance)) page, the source being from The Annotated Chronicles.

Two of the other key characteristics of kender—their curiosity and kleptomania—were introduced by Hickman.[4][6] Hickman was uncomfortable with the notion of a "race of thieves" in his games, but still wanted the skills typically associated with thieves, so he added their "innocent tendency to 'borrow' things for indeterminate periods of time."[3]

"innocent tendency to borrow things for an indeterminate amount of time" is a really nice way to say "Thief who might give it back when caught" as far as I'm concerned.

They likely would have been as innocent as he intended if it weren't something anyone could use to "borrow" things and give them back post campaign. It's fine, so long as it's returned... eventually, when I'm done with it.

I'd say this is an example of the cobra effect. Hickman wanted to avoid having a race defined by thievery and in attempting that made a race that is (seemingly) universally despised for their absolute and unstoppable urge to steal from you.

EDIT: Gosh it's even worse reading into it more, they've got the gall to be offended at being called a thief when they don't see any issue with taking your belongings in the first place. Just baked in excuses for a PC to wreak havoc and blame it on their fantastic roleplay ability.

No wonder they're not recommended as player characters. Let's keep it that way from now on.

[Ozreth]

Back when Dark Sun came out in '91, I was convinced that it was the Forgotten Realms, just 2000 or 3000 years in the future. I believed this because "Tyr" was both a god in Forgotten Realms and a City in Dark Sun. I thought that TSR was going to roll out some massive magical/psionic apocalypse that would kill Elminister, banish the FR Gods, and turn Faerun into a desert.

Whoa. That's cool. Haven't logged into this site in quite some time now and only check it every few months. Logged in to let you know that I'm adding this quote to my signature.

[KorvinStarmast]

@JadedDM
halfling thieves who maliciously steal things from people as compared to
Hickman was uncomfortable with the notion of a "race of thieves" in his games, but still wanted the skills typically associated with thieves, so he added their "innocent tendency to 'borrow' things for indeterminate periods of time."
I fail to see where "malicious" is where you claim that it is.
(Again, I do not care for it as world building)
But I remain correct about him wanting hobbits without having hobbits, which Devils_Advocate has expanded upon in some detail.

Look, I was around when this stuff came out. It was bloody obvious what they were doing to anyone with even a remote familiarity with the genre as it was growing, at the time.

And to give MW and TH credit, they were working without a net and did a pretty good job. I think it is fair to say that they were laying the foundation of a second generation of Swords and Sorcery lit, perhaps pulpy, but heck they had a few best sellers. A variety of other authors were able to ride their muses down the road that TH and MW helped to pave.

[Tawmis]

Heh. I am surprised there's still quite a bit of discussion around Dragonlance. I love Dragonlance, but even I said, I doubt it's going to be Dragonlance (in regards to the original purpose of this thread). But hey, if we wanna keep talking Dragonlance and 5e, count me in! :)




I liked the Deathgate cycle but didn't keep those books either.

I had an entire BBS (bulliten board system - yes, the thing with phone modems) centered around The Death Gate series called "The Nexus."


For Twamis: I guess I'm being Debbie Downer here, and for me the Kender is the deal breaker. So yeah, I need to stop.

Plenty of people really enjoy/enjoyed that setting.

Naw. You have an opinion, vastly different than mine, but that doesn't mean ye need to stop. So you don't like Dragonalnce (as a book or for 5e). We can agree to disagree and be all right and keep talking about it. So far, it's been civil.


Kender have a lot of problems (at least, ones that I can't really get past. Let's not even get into the problems behind the existence of half kender...) but I don't think they're the only issue. Gully dwarves are Dragonlance as well, correct? I believe they are also one of the most widely despised races. To me their depiction from what I know is rather...cruel and mean spirited. They apparently cannot count as well as some real life animals? And then there's the tinker gnomes, which I know very little of but have heard nothing but complaints about. Does anyone have a more positive take on them?

Dragonlance seems to just have a lot of baggage as a setting that for 5th would have to be changed pretty extensively or left out entirely, which feels like more work than WotC is typically willing to put into their settings. I figure they will probably end up including Grayhawk over it, as the two setting do seem somewhat similar.

Personally, I'm hoping for Planescape, Spelljammer and Darksun. They feel the most "different" to me; Grawhawk and Dragonlance feel, in my opinion, very similar to Forgotten Realms and I don't feel like there is a lot you can do in those settings that you absolutely couldn't make work in forgotten realms.

It's true, that one might think a Gully Dwarf might be problematic. But D&D also defined "High Elves" (or Gold Elves, or whatever) as arrogant, self-centered, etc. But that doesn't mean every High Elf has to have that same attitude. They give the "general population" description - but that doesn't mean every single one of them is like that.

I firmly believe importing Dragonlance, as much as I want it to happen - would take a lot of work. Between the Knights of Solmania (Rose, Sword, Crown - each being their own), three orders of Wizards, the way the Moon impacts Wizards/magic, etc. Some of it could easily be done (Knights is simply broken up into a path - start as Crown, work up to Sword at Level 10, then 11 to 20 is Rose), the Wizards and the moon could be done with Add +1d4 when the moon is aligned or whatever, giving a bonus (1d4 damage, lasts 1d4 minutes longer, etc) as an optional rule (or just do away with the Moons impacting Wizards). Kender, like Dwarves in old editions, don't really do anything other than Rogue type things (no mages, barbarians, etc) - but could be done. (Not sure how they'd handle a Kender mage... a Kender who has overcome his need to be overly curious and study instead, could be a thing).


I never had a problem with Kender in my games. When I ran it I would randomly have items that the kender picked up in his day to day travels with the group and often from the group. I would remind the player he was playing an innocent klepto that generally doesnt even know he picked anything up. Kind of like how people mindlessly click pens and dont even realize it until someone nearby calls them on it. Many times a player would go to use something and it wasnt there and they would look at the kender and he would go oh yeah, this? I would generate his pouch contents depending on where they were, in town or just the party, and would pick a few items that would be found in those environments. Sticks, sling bullet, healing potion, for example.


My DM (way back when) would basically have a chart of 100 things he'd roll against. And like 00 was "Something useful" so if the party go in trouble and I said, "I reach into my bag and pull out..." (He'd roll) and sometimes it was, "The feather of an axe beak!"

[SaintRidley]

I definitely want Spelljammer and Planescape. Metasettings are awesome for linking up worlds so you can do fun things with setting hopping. Also I find the Blood War politics (most easily assisted with Planescape stuff) and Illithid stellar empire/war against Gith factions stuff (most easily assisted with Spelljammer stuff) irresistable.

For the third, we have Eberron now, and the only other setting I think is worth a damn is Dark Sun, so I want that. Give me Dark Sun in all its brutality and hard mode, please.

[Tawmis]

It's like trying to roleplay in Middle-Earth. Simply too much history, overly developed, and too many well known characters. Run something in one of those settings with someone who knows all the books better than you? No thanks, I'll pass.


I wanted to start here (as an avid fan of Tolkien). I know - despite my passion for Tolkien's writing - that there are a metric ton of people out there who know it WAY (and I wish I could emphasize the word "Way" like... a lot) more than I do. Similar to Dragonlance - I've read the books quite a few times. But I am sure someone out there knows it better than me. I am positive of it.

And yet, I play the Lord of the Rings Online MMO - and find countless adventures there. I don't think I've run into a "known" character yet in that MMO.

And for the person who might be like, "That's not how it is in the Tolkien books!" - just remind them, that the gaming session is similar to the movies, which also don't follow the books exactly. What you're doing is playing in a parallel universe that has almost exactly the same history, but different events may have shifted the "known" world of the books. I believe even 5e, explains that everyone is playing in the "multiverse" of Forgotten Realms. That's why 10 different groups, all playing some official module, can do whatever they want and produce utterly different results.

As someone who has played - and run - Dragonlance - I never encountered (as a player) any of the official characters, nor as a DM did I ever use them. In my own games, it was a group that helped win the war (for which the Chronicle series was based off of) - but like a large group, of like 40. So there's no hand picked heroes to meet or overshadow anyone. Why? Because of the wonderful multiverse.

Which for me, has always addressed this concern:



I really dislike the idea of Dragonlance as a 5e setting. I feel like it suffers from years of creative baggage. Almost 200 books and all those heroes and their descendants that take center stage time and again really drags player agency down tremendously. Forgotten Realms and Greyhawk to a degree suffer the same baggage. I think there comes a point where a setting becomes too developed and has too much history for me want to go adventuring there.

[Trafalgar]

Whoa. That's cool. Haven't logged into this site in quite some time now and only check it every few months. Logged in to let you know that I'm adding this quote to my signature.

Thank you! I don't believe I have ever been quoted in someone's signature before, even in my own.

[Segev]

If you want lots of new mechanics and a higher-power character build as part of the setting lore, there’s always a possibility of Birthright.

[KorvinStarmast]

If you want lots of new mechanics and a higher-power character build as part of the setting lore, there’s always a possibility of Birthright. While that's an intriguing possibility, it's almost a second game in we look at how 5e is built from the ground up. Birthright seems to be aimed to hit a sweet spot that would translate into something like late Tier 2 and early Tier 3 for 5e.

I'll still hope for Darksun since the over population of book heroes mentioned above isn't a problem; surviving is. :smallbiggrin:

[Segev]

With Dark Sun, would defiler and preserver be sorcerer or wizard subclasses? Or would doing magic just have those attached to it in such a way that all subclasses are fine as-is?

[Tawmis]

Dark Sun would also need to shift a lot of things around, if they wanted to remain true to the Dark Sun setting.

Dropping metal as being extremely rare, gold coins are out, classes would also be changed around (for example, it even says a Bard would know as much about Entertaining as they would with Assassination and having Psionics).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Sun#Classes

It also has the problem with "lore" where they used "metaplots" where it evolved by novels being released.

That said, just explaining it as a portal to another world/dimension, would allow folks to either venture to "Dark Sun" setting, or start in a Dark Sun setting.

[Luccan]

Dark Sun would also need to shift a lot of things around, if they wanted to remain true to the Dark Sun setting.

Dropping metal as being extremely rare, gold coins are out, classes would also be changed around (for example, it even says a Bard would know as much about Entertaining as they would with Assassination and having Psionics).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Sun#Classes

It also has the problem with "lore" where they used "metaplots" where it evolved by novels being released.

That said, just explaining it as a portal to another world/dimension, would allow folks to either venture to "Dark Sun" setting, or start in a Dark Sun setting.

They might have to make concessions for the edition, but I think you could drop several classes while still adapting the base ideas (If you want a non-casting, assassination focused, psionic bard, just use a psychic Rogue with Perfomance; Templars would probably work as a subclass for Paladins).

I think the Yawning Portal World Serpent Inn has a single door that leads to Athas, but presumably whatever it is that keeps it cut off from the rest of Spelljammer also makes that portal hard to find or impossible to use for most Athasians.


With Dark Sun, would defiler and preserver be sorcerer or wizard subclasses? Or would doing magic just have those attached to it in such a way that all subclasses are fine as-is?

I'd assume they'd just make it a choice whenever you cast arcane spells. Making it a one time choice would kinda remove any nuance from choosing to defile or not.

[Amnestic]

Does Diablo count as a 'classic' setting after the hilariously bad 3.X 'adaptation' they released?

Probably not.

[Comaward]

I think the Yawning Portal has a single door that leads to Athas, but presumably whatever it is that keeps it cut off from the rest of Spelljammer also makes that portal hard to find or impossible to use for most Athasians.

You’re thinking of the World Serpent Inn.

[Luccan]

You’re thinking of the World Serpent Inn.

Ah yes thank you. I will amend my post

[Trafalgar]

With Dark Sun, would defiler and preserver be sorcerer or wizard subclasses? Or would doing magic just have those attached to it in such a way that all subclasses are fine as-is?

This is one of the problems with Dark Sun in 5e.In original Dark Sun, Defilers actually gained levels quicker than Preservers. As I recall, a defiler needed 1750xp to reach level 2, a Preserver needed 2500xp. How would that translate to other arcane casters like sorcerers and EKs? I don't know. I also think that many 5e DMs don't use xp at all.

In 2e, Dark Sun was, for all intents and purposes, a different TTRPG than Forgotten Realms or Dragon Lance. For example: In Dark Sun you could have a 22 in a Stat (24 for Half Gant Strength) while 18 was a rare thing in 2e RAW. That's why they walled it off from the other worlds.

[GeoffWatson]

The new settings are Transformers, Power Rangers, and My Little Pony.

https://www.toynews-online.biz/2020/09/30/hasbro-and-renegade-game-studios-to-develop-tabletop-and-rpg-games-for-power-rangers-transformers-my-little-pony/

[Segev]

The new settings are Transformers, Power Rangers, and My Little Pony.

https://www.toynews-online.biz/2020/09/30/hasbro-and-renegade-game-studios-to-develop-tabletop-and-rpg-games-for-power-rangers-transformers-my-little-pony/

Does this mean Friendship is Dragons will become canon? :P

[opaopajr]

The new settings are Transformers, Power Rangers, and My Little Pony.

https://www.toynews-online.biz/2020/09/30/hasbro-and-renegade-game-studios-to-develop-tabletop-and-rpg-games-for-power-rangers-transformers-my-little-pony/

:smallredface: Well I think that bit of news blew my sarcasm meter. Not even my mention of oft forgotten Pelinore could rival this plus GI Joe D&D for a shock.

Isn't it ironic, don'tcha think? A little too ironic! And yeah I really do think... :smallcool:

[Trafalgar]

The new settings are Transformers, Power Rangers, and My Little Pony.

https://www.toynews-online.biz/2020/09/30/hasbro-and-renegade-game-studios-to-develop-tabletop-and-rpg-games-for-power-rangers-transformers-my-little-pony/

Can I find a portal to take my Barbarian to Little Pony Land and go murder hobo?