| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Gyor |
Posted - 01 Dec 2016 : 20:08:20
Do you think we will get a FRCG 5e someday? |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Gyor |
Posted - 07 Dec 2016 : 16:46:30
The changes in the realms were too broad for half measures like the SCAG. |
| Bravesteel |
Posted - 07 Dec 2016 : 15:03:14
I voted "yes" as I think it would be a (relatively) easy way for them to make some guaranteed money, but I wouldn't buy it as I have no need for it. I run AD&D 1E now and have everything I could ever need. I wouldn't mind more novels though!
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
According to Mearls' reasoning, it is pointless to write books that have already been done in the past, and a book won't be made unless it is new and innovative. Granted, he was talking about stuff like PHBII e MMII, but I think that in his mind this applies to books like the FRCS.
I think this might be closer to the truth than we realize. Think about it, D&D Classics are starting to be available via Print-on-Demand, and I could see a time where you get all of your "meat" from these older books with small updates like SCAG that advance the timeline in areas and sprinkle with some fresh seasoning. |
| Gyor |
Posted - 07 Dec 2016 : 14:30:48
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
I'm under the impression that the SCAG was originally designed purely as a Sword Coast guide (maybe to be added to the cancelled EE adventurer's companion, or w/e that book was called), and that the remaining info about the setting and deities in general were added as an afterthought, to throw a bone to us FR fans clamoring for more updates.
You could be right. Its still no replacement for a FRCG. |
| Irennan |
Posted - 07 Dec 2016 : 14:13:50
I'm under the impression that the SCAG was originally designed purely as a Sword Coast guide (maybe to be added to the cancelled EE adventurer's companion, or w/e that book was called), and that the remaining info about the setting and deities in general were added as an afterthought, to throw a bone to us FR fans clamoring for more updates. |
| Gyor |
Posted - 07 Dec 2016 : 14:06:07
Still had more details then the SCAG. I mean we don't even have a complete map of Faerun for goodness sakes. There are major regions completely not covered, its lacking in so much details it goofy and otherside of the Sword Coast almost unuseable.
Too much has changed to really be able to use previous FRCGs, between the Spellplague, Sundering, Time Jumps and various events they simply don't apply outside of history checks. |
| CorellonsDevout |
Posted - 07 Dec 2016 : 00:55:05
It'd be nice to have something more detailed than he SCAG. Then again, the 4e CG was sparse compared to what they had been in the past. |
| Irennan |
Posted - 04 Dec 2016 : 22:20:31
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
quote:
Originally posted by Shadowsoul
Well according to a WoTc survey, most people play their games using homebrew and not AP's, even though they continue to push them. Doing a campaign guide makes sense beause it's what the majority of people want.
I'm not saying you're wrong but where did you get that data from?
There was a WotC survey about that, and they then publicly released the results. |
| Gary Dallison |
Posted - 04 Dec 2016 : 21:13:19
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Entrails
I don't think they will. Even though we would all like them to, 80% of the material would be re-hash from previous editions/versions.
At this point though, there's nothing stopping someone from here creating one and publishing it on the DMsGuild. It wouldn't surprise me if that isn't what WotC is hoping/waiting for.
I think several people are working on one (me included, although mine is only set in the traditional flavour realms, not the new cherry flavour with and twist of lime and no added sugar). |
| Diffan |
Posted - 04 Dec 2016 : 20:34:41
quote:
Originally posted by Shadowsoul
Well according to a WoTc survey, most people play their games using homebrew and not AP's, even though they continue to push them. Doing a campaign guide makes sense beause it's what the majority of people want.
I'm not saying you're wrong but where did you get that data from? |
| Gyor |
Posted - 04 Dec 2016 : 20:28:21
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Entrails
I don't think they will. Even though we would all like them to, 80% of the material would be re-hash from previous editions/versions.
At this point though, there's nothing stopping someone from here creating one and publishing it on the DMsGuild. It wouldn't surprise me if that isn't what WotC is hoping/waiting for.
Actually alot has changed, I think 25% to 50% at most will be a rehash. |
| Gyor |
Posted - 04 Dec 2016 : 20:26:46
quote:
Originally posted by sfdragon
well hate to say, but unleses they to a setting; they are not likely to get anymore of my money for books.
Yeah I'm reaching that position myself, its getting frustrating. Maybe we should start a petition. |
| sfdragon |
Posted - 04 Dec 2016 : 17:14:29
well hate to say, but unleses they to a setting; they are not likely to get anymore of my money for books. |
| Shadowsoul |
Posted - 04 Dec 2016 : 14:10:12
Well according to a WoTc survey, most people play their games using homebrew and not AP's, even though they continue to push them. Doing a campaign guide makes sense beause it's what the majority of people want. |
| EltonRobb |
Posted - 03 Dec 2016 : 01:59:55
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Entrails
I don't think they will. Even though we would all like them to, 80% of the material would be re-hash from previous editions/versions.
At this point though, there's nothing stopping someone from here creating one and publishing it on the DMsGuild. It wouldn't surprise me if that isn't what WotC is hoping/waiting for.
We'll need Ed, and a good layout artist if this is going to happen.
|
| Lord Entrails |
Posted - 03 Dec 2016 : 01:56:56
I don't think they will. Even though we would all like them to, 80% of the material would be re-hash from previous editions/versions.
At this point though, there's nothing stopping someone from here creating one and publishing it on the DMsGuild. It wouldn't surprise me if that isn't what WotC is hoping/waiting for.
|
| Diffan |
Posted - 02 Dec 2016 : 21:59:55
quote:
Originally posted by sleyvas
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
Looking at their content, what they've already done, and the way they've been doing each supplement (via Adventure archs) signs are pointing to no. Each adventure gives more detail into the surrounding area and lore of the land that they probably don't feel the need to.
Bear in mind, a lot of people like me only bought Storm King's Thunder BECAUSE it had the surrounding lore. So, in my view, if they keep up that formula, at some point they can "combine" all this data with a little work into a campaign setting and make some updates/additions.
Sure, a lot of people also bought supplements from other settings just because they added in things like new classes, spells, and Prestige Classes/Paragon Paths. Look at the Forgotten Realms Player's Guide (4e) that also had Genasi, Drow, and Swordmages as player options. Many people bought those books simply because they had additional options without even once considering actually using the Forgotten Realms part of said book.
Again going by what WotC has done and stated, Setting books simply for the fact of info about the setting aren't going to be made. We're fortunate enough, however, that the main setting 5e's is about is the Forgotten realms and that each AP we receive is just more info about the setting. It's why adventures like Murder In Baldur's Gate, Legends of the Crystal Shard, and the third one (forget the name) were REALLY popular and great additions even if you don't run the adventure. Imagine being a big Eberron fan though, the only thing they've gotten were a few things in Unearthed Arcana articles.
I'm just saying it could be a lot worse. |
| sleyvas |
Posted - 02 Dec 2016 : 15:02:31
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
Perhaps you're right. After all, they said "no MM2", yet they wrote VGtM, which basically is a MM2 with another title...
While I like VGtM, I wouldn't label it an MM2. While I liked a lot of the material, much of it was rehashed (the lore on kobolds, orcs, and hobgoblins wasn't really new... same could be said for others). I was glad though to see the monsters that they did release, but for sheer numbers I'd say if you want an MM2 look at kobold press' Tome of Beasts.
What I'm really wondering is can we use monsters from the Tome of Beasts in DM's Guild submissions?? They aren't WotC... so my initial thoughts are no... which is sad because they essentially developed a lot of what I visually want to use. The powers my be different, and even some of the lore may not fit for some of the monsters, but you can't look at the Alseid for instance and not instantly think "Hybsil". There's numerous other examples. |
| Irennan |
Posted - 02 Dec 2016 : 14:41:00
Perhaps you're right. After all, they said "no MM2", yet they wrote VGtM, which basically is a MM2 with another title... |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 02 Dec 2016 : 14:37:02
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
I honestly think it makes no sense, but Mearls was referring to book models, rather than to the content itself. A PHB II would be totally new, since no PHB II has ever been written for 5e, yet he said that it's an old model which should not be followed.
I can agree with not making a PHB II -- I thought it was a really bad maneuver when they did it before... But ruleset and setting material are different beasts, especially when the latter has been blown up, stitched back together, and fast-forwarded, in the meantime. |
| Irennan |
Posted - 02 Dec 2016 : 14:02:39
I honestly think it makes no sense, but Mearls was referring to book models, rather than to the content itself. A PHB II would be totally new, since no PHB II has ever been written for 5e, yet he said that it's an old model which should not be followed. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 02 Dec 2016 : 14:00:26
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
According to Mearls' reasoning, it is pointless to write books that have already been done in the past, and a book won't be made unless it is new and innovative.
Yeah, I'm not going to buy that statement. One of the stated reasons for the Spellplague was that they didn't have any places to set stories, because they'd all been done... As if a place can only ever have one story! And then, what was one of the first things they did, after the Spellplague? Set like 6 or 7 books in Waterdeep.
Since there has been very little info released for most of the Realms since the end of the 3E era, pretty much anything released, regardless of where it was set, would be new. |
| Irennan |
Posted - 02 Dec 2016 : 13:46:26
According to Mearls' reasoning, it is pointless to write books that have already been done in the past, and a book won't be made unless it is new and innovative. Granted, he was talking about stuff like PHBII e MMII, but I think that in his mind this applies to books like the FRCS. |
| sleyvas |
Posted - 02 Dec 2016 : 13:37:00
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
Looking at their content, what they've already done, and the way they've been doing each supplement (via Adventure archs) signs are pointing to no. Each adventure gives more detail into the surrounding area and lore of the land that they probably don't feel the need to.
Bear in mind, a lot of people like me only bought Storm King's Thunder BECAUSE it had the surrounding lore. So, in my view, if they keep up that formula, at some point they can "combine" all this data with a little work into a campaign setting and make some updates/additions. |
| Diffan |
Posted - 02 Dec 2016 : 07:38:13
Looking at their content, what they've already done, and the way they've been doing each supplement (via Adventure archs) signs are pointing to no. Each adventure gives more detail into the surrounding area and lore of the land that they probably don't feel the need to. |
| KanzenAU |
Posted - 02 Dec 2016 : 03:23:09
I think it will eventually be too much of a drawcard for them to not do it. Just, like, don't hold your breath. You'll most certainly die. |
| EltonRobb |
Posted - 02 Dec 2016 : 02:58:58
I think there will be one, eventually. :) A campaign guide is needed but the number of writers is so low that it won't be a while. Probably never (5th edition the last edition?). Working on adventures using the Realms seems to be the best way to go for them, for now. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 01 Dec 2016 : 23:06:24
When Paizo started out (on their own), they started with AP's, and most of those were centered around Varisia (just one country/region). They built the rest of their campaign world around that, and eventually produced a CG.
The one thing that I think hurt them in that plan was that Varisia seems 'off' compared to the rest. not just because of the level of detail (like comparing Cormyr to the rest of Faerūn), but because it WAS 'the campaign world' for a time, and contained THREE different (human) races. Now that they've expanded outward, that feels really 'forced' to me - why should three racial subtypes exist in one country, when most of the other subtypes are spread across several countries? Golarion also has a bit of 'Kitchen Sink-iness' to it, but all 'high fantasy' D&D worlds do.
While FR has a lot of the latter (which has been slowly back-filled and fixed over the years), it doesn't have to worry about the former; the 5e designers can create their (5e) world a piece at a time without the worry that it will appear lopsided in the end. They have a blueprint - something Paizo was lacking (at first).
So, I think I understand what they are trying to do - build the fanbase before you alienate half of them, but I also don't think they will come out with a FRCG... at least not for 5e. Whereas Paizo had no world in which to ground their AP's (at first), FR does - they can come out with them until the end of time and there will still be a world there, in the background.
Because if they planned to cover everything (the world) in 5e, then what would be the point of the DM's Guild? Unless they are waiting for 6e, and then they will take a step back from the DM's Guild, or at least try to control it more (like what they did with the RPGA in 4e). You don't hand away the 'keys to the kingdom' if you still planned on using it yourself... at least not in this edition. Just my opinion is all. |
| sleyvas |
Posted - 01 Dec 2016 : 21:43:37
I too see it as they are doing the reverse, and actually I'm kind of okay with that. I think they need to spread their wings on the adventure front and start building some adventures in other areas and fleshing those out as a result. Since so many of us already have the bare bones of the other regions, just not the latest changes, it would help if they did like they did with the SCAG whenever they put in a new module in a region. In essence, put in new rumors about what's happening in the other various regions of the world, to help slightly flesh those areas out more.... then turn around and focus on the region at hand but make their focus on the regions broader (for instance, maybe the bloodstone lands of Vaasa/Damara/Impiltur and include the Moonsea and Vast areas OR the Unapproachable East and maybe the Hordelands too OR the Old Empires and Shaar OR the Shining South and Shaar OR the Unapproachable East and the Old Empires and the Hordelands OR Kara-Tur, the Hordelands, and Zakhara OR Maztica, Anchorome, and Katashaka). The thing that I saw with Storm King's Thunder where it has the characters going all over would seem to fit this kind of large scale module combined with an overview of the various towns in the area. Given that they've already got a skeleton shell of knowledge about the cities in these regions means they can lift a good bit (as in read what exists to get a feel for the place), modify and replace. Maybe note a replacement of ruler, addition of some temples, emptying of some dungeon, creation of a new dungeon, encroachment of a power group, population changes, etc... |
| Adhriva |
Posted - 01 Dec 2016 : 21:14:15
If you ask me, they are still behaving like the default setting is Points of Light but with different names. I do not think they seek to flesh out the world any more then they have to, and would prefer to keep it more open for people to make their own adventures and content. |
| Gareth |
Posted - 01 Dec 2016 : 21:12:16
I have wondered if they are trying something different this time. In previous editions, the Campaign setting has been one of the first releases for that edition with subsequent suppliments expanding on it and also the time line.
I think this time, perhaps, they are doing it in reverse. The adventures/SC Guide etc preceeding a setting book intended to be about half way into the edition cycle (In roughly the place of the 3.5 FR Players Guide), which will draw from the work already done and probably acting to a degree as a compilation of lore from the adventure books.
|
|
|
