This is part of their overall plan to release a new campaign setting every year. 3.5 had less campaign settings so could focus more on a few, 4e plans on having a wide variety as would happen with a new one each year.
edit: maybe they should do more splatbooks but do them in soft cover instead of hard cover..
and allegedly a few dragon and dungeon articles, but what I have seen most of, tends to be more of in Points of Light aka the core setting, that has not campaign guide just articles and the primary core.
They are starting this month and going to do every month articles for the settings, this month we got for FR:
Gontal: Dominions of Nehu
By Bruce R. Cordell
Once a primordial bastion on Abeir, this fragmented realm was destroyed when its master was thrown down
I don't like the core setting. It's missing a lot of the flavor that a unique campaign setting has. I guess it is just too generic...
I miss the time of really fleshed out campaign settings. How I loved the D&D Gazeteer series depicting the Known Wolrd (much later called Mystara),
The reason that TSR fell apart, well one of the reasons was it's people were all fighting each other every product had to be customized for that setting.
And as such they learnt a lesson.
They said that there going to be able to make more books for different settings which will be great.
I mean sure I am not in the majority wanting a Planescape book but ask about Darksun people they had considerablely higher following.
And I believe ravenloft is now owned by someone else.
But still even if I do not continue with fourth ed handbooks I would buy a books on Planescape and Ravenloft.
Cause they were fantastic settings.
An old rant: I still think wizard should make use of the Magic: the gathering settings for D&D. I mean, think about it. Once a year they got an other department designing a lot of setting material (fluff) with tons and tons of conceptual art for a fantasy setting, and then they just toss it! Imagine instead if you took all that hard work on a setting and added som 4e details until you had material for a hardcover 4e setting book. The products would sell each other, gamers in both camps would be more likely to try out the other camp. Win, win, win. Seems like a slam dunk to me...
Is it true that there will be only 3 products per campaign setting? Would it be the number of books in the entire lifespan of a campaign under the 4E system? I found it strange. Eberron, for example, had about 10 hardcover source books in 2 years or less. If we get only 2 hardcovers and 1 adventure, then a lot of information will be missing...
Which means the DM is free to create such information as needed, as fits his gaming style, vision of the world, and personal needs.
It's a feature, not a bug.
I don't like the core setting. It's missing a lot of the flavor that a unique campaign setting has. I guess it is just too generic...
It's supposed to be generic, because that lets the DM put his own stamp on things. 4e expects a little creativity and imagination out of the DM, rather than simply handing him a setting and going 'here's every last little bit of minutia'.
It's supposed to be generic, because that lets the DM put his own stamp on things. 4e expects a little creativity and imagination out of the DM, rather than simply handing him a setting and going 'here's every last little bit of minutia'.
This.
I am building my own campaign world and I love that I keep or toss what I want from the core setting. Like I have my own pantheon of gods, and quite a large one at that. So I decided to have some of my gods use the information for established gods like Pelor and such, they just go by different names. Made my job in that department much easier. On the flip side, some of the Feywild and Shadowfell locations described in the Manual of the Planes just don't work for my setting, so I tossed them. I kept the ones that do fit. I've also modified teh races as I needed to and things like that.
I started this setting in 3.5. I never finished it because I knew I would have to spell out every little detail to make it work for that edition. I didn't mind, but it was going to take an enormous amount of work. Honestly 4e ha smade it very, very easy for me to actually create this setting, and do so in a reasonable amount of time. I'm about half done with it, and I really just started working on it when I realized my deadline is June (starting a campaign over the Summer). I figure I'll be done next weekish.
I don't like the core setting. It's missing a lot of the flavor that a unique campaign setting has.
It's not supposed to be specific. The core 'setting' exists as a canvas on which individual groups will create their own worlds and campaigns. It's scaffolding, not a fully dressed set like FR.
I'm glad they won't be glutting the shelves with reams upon reams of campaign specific stuff. I'm one of those people who just wants a framework, I'll make up the details. If there's no official version of something and I'm stuck for ideas, I'll cruise fan-fiction sites for inspiration.
Is it true that there will be only 3 products per campaign setting?
Yes. And thankfully so.
There is no problem to use 3.5 books (eberron and forgotten realms) for all the fluff and setting information.
Except of course that the current 4E FR plays 100 year in the future after a world shattering apocalypse thing which pretty much invalidates every fluff from post 4E FR books.
You can still use them to steal ideas for your homebrew, but as information source for the current FR they are useless.
I like printed books. I guess people who want to concentrate on one campaign setting (and frankly, how many of us are going to actually play in more than one?) would have to hunt old books to flesh out their campaign world.
Or one could, I dunno, make stuff up?
The reason that TSR fell apart, well one of the reasons was it's people were all fighting each other every product had to be customized for that setting. And as such they learnt a lesson.
They learned the wrong lesson. It wasn't that D&D had so many settings, it's that EACH setting had so many products for it - no matter how niche the setting was. Al Qadim, for instance, had several boxed sets and two large manuals, as well as a 'compelte' guide.
I like that they're more reserved in what comes out per setting, but I feel that DDI should have a hell of a lot more material for these settings (and, let's face it, a lot of this stuff is ALREADY WRITTEN and just needs updated for 4E) as well as release the setting books themselves in a more timely fashion.
There's a lot of settings to go, and only one and a half more years of 4E to do it in, after all...
I miss the time of really fleshed out campaign settings. How I loved the D&D Gazeteer series depicting the Known Wolrd (much later called Mystara),
See. I really liked when the Expert book first came out, which was before the Gazeteer's were produced for the Known World, and I liked fleshing out the world map myself. I kept the names of the countries and cities but I preferred to flesh out those cities and towns myself. I like the generic campaign setting in 4E for the same reasons.
I liked Greyhawk when I first got in to Dungeons and Dragons because I learned how a campaign world should fit together.
When Forgotten Realms first came out I thought I was in heaven. It was fantastic then the supplements came and came and came... With each supplement I started seeing the Monty Haul syndrome creep in to each supplement. I ditched Forgotten Realms shortly after the 2nd edition version came out.
I loved Dragonlance when it first came out. I ditched Dragonlance after TSR crapped out the SAGA system and Weis and Hickman ****ed up their world by writing books to change the world to the new edition. Then came 3E and Weis and Hickman ****ed the world up again... Can you tell I prefer the time setting of War of the Lance? The time after war was rife with adventure hooks.
I found Dark Sun and I loved that system. Unfortunately, the 2nd edition Psionics system needed a damn, big overhaul. I picked this setting back up and ran a version of it for 3.5 for awhile. I can't wait to try a 4E version of this setting.
Birthright didn't seem my cup of tea so I passed on it plus I wasn't playing 2nd edition as much when that setting came out.
Al Qdim (whatever) didn't interest me either so I never picked it up but I wasn't playing 2nd edition as much when that setting came out.
Maztica seemed like it could be cool but I wasn't playing 2nd edition much when that setting came out.
Ravenloft was an awesome adventure (the sequel was cool too) in AD&D 1E. That is the way I like to remember it. In my mind there wasn't a Ravenloft boxed set that took place on some Demi-Plane. I refuse to acknowledge it.
If i get three books for Planescape I will be over the moon!
The reason that TSR fell apart, well one of the reasons was it's people were all fighting each other every product had to be customized for that setting.
And as such they learnt a lesson.
They said that there going to be able to make more books for different settings which will be great.
I mean sure I am not in the majority wanting a Planescape book but ask about Darksun people they had considerablely higher following.
And I believe ravenloft is now owned by someone else.
But still even if I do not continue with fourth ed handbooks I would buy a books on Planescape and Ravenloft.
Cause they were fantastic settings.
Ravenloft was licensed out to Sword & Sorcery for 3.x, but is now under WotC control again. And unfortunately, it's pretty much guaranteed that Ravenloft, Planescape, and Spelljammer are all only going to appear in Dragon/Dungeon articles and books like Manual of the Planes (or Sigil in DMG2), instead of getting their own campaign setting treatment.
Except of course that the current 4E FR plays 100 year in the future after a world shattering apocalypse thing which pretty much invalidates every fluff from post 4E FR books.
You can still use them to steal ideas for your homebrew, but as information source for the current FR they are useless.
Of course you could always, oh I dunno, use the 3.x setting with the 4e rules ...
There's a lot of settings to go, and only one and a half more years of 4E to do it in, after all...
Uh .... what? What crazy conspiracy theory without a single shred of foundation did you get that idea from?
Uh .... what? What crazy conspiracy theory without a single shred of foundation did you get that idea from?
There's no conspiracy theory to it at all. The timing of the original 'mission statement' for 4E (three years with an expanded core set once every year) would put either a new edition or major update at GenCon 2010, a few months after the PHB3 comes out.
That's a little under a year and a half from now.
There's no conspiracy theory to it at all. The timing of the original 'mission statement' for 4E (three years with an expanded core set once every year) would put either a new edition or major update at GenCon 2010, a few months after the PHB3 comes out.
That's a little under a year and a half from now.
The 4E "mission statement" never claimed that it only had a three-year lifespan. I'd really like to know where you're getting this idea from.
Strangely I've seen a statement or two that seems to imply that 2010 will be some kind of gloom and doom point for this edition, even one that seems to say that they're expecting the entire line to die then. What's up with this?
Do you have sources you can direct the rest of us to for this? Otherwise it's pretty much hearsay...
Strangely I've seen a statement or two that seems to imply that 2010 will be some kind of gloom and doom point for this edition, even one that seems to say that they're expecting the entire line to die then. What's up with this?
2010 will see the first PHB that includes less traditional fantasy power sources (such as Ki and probably Psionic and Shadow) as well as being the first year that WotC will be forced to release a setting they know may not sell (because we'll be past FR and Eberron and into uncharted territories (i.e. a new or revised setting, most likely Darksun). Finally, it will be the first year in which the next Draconomicon will feature something other than Metallic or Chromatic Dragons (most likely Gem Dragons).
All in all, 2010 will be the deciding year for 4E. If WotC can get past the big hump, the system will thrive for years to come. If, however, 4E falters then we may see a new direction in 2011...
No, all of what I hear about this comes from sourceless forum posts. I'm not saying that I'm expecting this, I'm just saying that it seems to be some kind of overwhelming paranoia on the forums. I'm trying to figure out why people are acting this way.
Gotcha. Thanks for the clarification.
There's a lot they can do if they find they need to change course.
But somehow I think they're make these less traditional things interesting enough they won't need to. I sense a hunger for the new out there. I think they'll do fine.
The 4E "mission statement" never claimed that it only had a three-year lifespan. I'd really like to know where you're getting this idea from.
He must have grabbed the wrong fortune cookie....