Paizo Top Nav Branding
Welcome, guest! | Sign In | My Account | My Subscriptions | My Downloads | My Wishlists | Shopping Cart   Shopping Cart | Help/FAQ
About Paizo   Messageboards   News   Paizo Blog   Help/FAQ  
Search
Links
Shop

Messageboards

Saving Shield, by Dumb Paladin

Good small town starting area?, by gang

Fighter advice needed to all you fighter fans!, by The Sleeping Dragon

Baatorian green steel., by the David

Removing Perception as a Skill, by Mortuum

"Charm Person" and in-Group Fighting, by The Sleeping Dragon

Item Creation Problems, by Inner Heru

Two weapon fighting unarmed, by zagnabbit

Barbarian archtype / Titan Mauler / level 3 / Massive Weapon, by Michael Foster 989

Books you would like to see rewritten by Paizo, by Kthulhu

Uncanny dodge: it help you if you are blinded?, by wraithstrike

Knights of the Black Horse in Kingmaker, by Paul Watson

Ring of Sustanance: Gimmick or Awesome Sauce?, by LoreKeeper

Ways to avoid AoO when within reach of a huge+ creature as a Cleric, by Rasmus Wagner

When I grow up..., by John Spalding

Online Campaigns

Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic, by Camris

DM Zyren's Heart of Journeys, by Attalas

Of Battle, Wolves and Winter. Discussion, by Stavo Warpblood

DM Bloodgargler Kingmaker Gameplay, by Bregor Rowain

Jormungandr's Jade Regent, by Ruhk "The Dandy"

DM Voice's Envoy of Geb - Game Thread, by Gabriel Helminth

DM Zyren's Heart of Light, by DM Zyren/ Heart of Light

DM Maslen Second Darkness pBp Gameplay Thread, by Grumm Gær

Ith's PFS pbp, by Sekhemre of Karnak

DM Voice's Osirion Expedition - Game Thread, by Setesh Bantling

GM Levi's {Advanced} Sands of Osirion Campaign Arc!, by Seif-al-Din ibn-Subhi

Crimson Throne of Lore, by Esmerelda Darkbane

Jade Regent, presented by DM Hamied - Campaign Thread, by Almar Ashfield

Legacy of Fire: Upon Shifting Sand [Chapter 1: Howl of the Carrion King] Recruitment, by Escharid Blackrose

The Story of the Stone: Kyrademon's Jade Regent PBP, Part III, by Melinda Sorn

   RSS Recent Posts Facebook Twitter Email
Note: Talk about 4th Edition here. Politely. Personal attacks or insults directed at other members of the Paizo community, or other companies in the industry, will not be tolerated.

Search
Search this Thread:


With the whittling down of setting by Wizards and the edition change, one wonders if there will be a new campaign setting.

Hmmmmm.


Kruelaid wrote:

With the whittling down of setting by Wizards and the edition change, one wonders if there will be a new campaign setting.

Hmmmmm.

From what they've said, not for a couple years. Their plans are to update one campaign setting a year, so that makes it 3 years off at least.


Do not forget about 4.5 in 2010, so add a year or two.


I suspect Eberron is going to be their baby for the next year. From the read I get from the vibes of the whole thing, they're working hard to cleanse their properties of all traces of influence from people they don't work with anymore, most notably Gary Gygax and his world of Greyhawk, but now also including Monte Cooke. Eberron is their first big post-TSR property, and when it outgrows itself to expansion, they'll possibly work on a new one. I think it bears watching the independent game designers for new worlds first, personally.


Rob G wrote:
I think it bears watching the independent game designers for new worlds first, personally.

Most of all Pathfinder.

Like you said, once they clean themselves up, one wonders where they will go, and how they will try to reel in younger players once Eberron gets old.

But it seems to me that a 'clean break' in the rules is also the time to usher in a new world, and when the dust settles after the release of 4 the designers are going to need something to do.


If there is no official support for the Greyhawk campaign setting in 4th edition then I guess I'll just start playing in Pathfinder's world, and buying all my supplements besides core books from Paizo. Is it really that hard to just suck it up and acknowledge the work that came before Wizards owned the property?

A new campaign setting is the last thing that D and D needs right now.

Apologies to the Pathfinder folks, of course.


Rob G wrote:
I suspect Eberron is going to be their baby for the next year.

Actually I think WotC mentioned that Forgotten Realms was going to be the first to get the 4th edition treatment. Eberron later on after that.


The recent design and development post on the Wizards of the Coast site about the style of the new D and D screamed "new generic campaign" setting to me.

Anyone else share these thoughts?


David Witanowski wrote:

The recent design and development post on the Wizards of the Coast site about the style of the new D and D screamed "new generic campaign" setting to me.

Anyone else share these thoughts?

Yes, it could be although both FR and Eberron seems to be the kind of world that they try to illustrate. As I understand this might be the reason that they didn't like GH which is a more straightforward world.


David Witanowski wrote:

The recent design and development post on the Wizards of the Coast site about the style of the new D and D screamed "new generic campaign" setting to me.

Anyone else share these thoughts?

Yup, been rooting around there the last few days.

If I were them I would try something a little different from FR and Eberron. After all, there isn't much other than scale and level of detail to differentiate FR from GH and DMing has gone a long way since GH. For example, looking at Pathfinder, it's really seeded with possibilities in a way that GH wasn't. Eberron, too, has more color, although I've never played, I have browsed through the books.

Well, it'll be a while before they make a move like that. Just speculatin'.


Well, given the possible changes to Eldarins, evil outsiders, and elves, it sounds as if they are making so many fundamental changes that if they might as well be making a new campaign setting. I don't see how they will be able to explain the fact that succubi and erinyes are actually the same creatures, and the ice devils are really yugoloths without creating a world that ignores what came before.

Taldor (RPG Superstar 2011 Top 16)

David Witanowski wrote:
Well, given the possible changes to Eldarins, evil outsiders, and elves, it sounds as if they are making so many fundamental changes that if they might as well be making a new campaign setting. I don't see how they will be able to explain the fact that succubi and erinyes are actually the same creatures, and the ice devils are really yugoloths without creating a world that ignores what came before.

They might as well call it a whole new Name too... it's not really what I think of as D&D...


Kruelaid wrote:

With the whittling down of setting by Wizards and the edition change, one wonders if there will be a new campaign setting.

Hmmmmm.

Yes, it will feature its own unique setting.

It will only cost $14.95 monthly for access.


Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Community / Gaming / D&D 4th Edition / All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

Recent threads in D&D 4th Edition

Monte Cook on modularity
My feelings about 5E D&D
Its not looking good for the fighter class in 5E



©2002–2012 Paizo Publishing, LLC®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Publishing, LLC, the Paizo golem logo, GameMastery, Pathfinder, Planet Stories, and Undefeated are registered trademarks of Paizo Publishing, LLC, and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure PathPathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Society, Pathfinder Battles, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Publishing, LLC. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Publishing under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.